Teoría Retórica en el siglo xvii español. una revision critica. 2002.pdf

8/13/2019 Teoría Retórica en el siglo xvii español. una revision critica. 2002.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/teoria-retorica-en-el-siglo-xvii-espanol-una-revision-critica-2002pdf 1/17

Rhetorical Theory in Sixteenth-Century Spain: A Critical SurveyAuthor(s): Jorge Fernández LópezSource: Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Spring 2002), pp. 133-148Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the International Society for the Historyof RhetoricStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rh.2002.20.2.133 .

Accessed: 26/12/2013 20:28

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of California Press and International Society for the History of Rhetoric are collaborating with

JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 148.206.53.9 on Thu, 26 Dec 2013 20:28:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ishr


http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rh.2002.20.2.133?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rh.2002.20.2.133?origin=JSTOR-pdf



http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal



Jorge Fernandez Lopez

133

© T h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l S o c i e t y f o r t h e H i s t o r y o f R h e t o r i c , Rhetorica, VolumeX X , N u m b e r 2 ( S p ri n g 2 0 0 2 ) . S e n d r e qu e st s f o r p er m is s io n t o r ep r in t t o : R i gh t sa n d P e rm i ss i on s , U n iv e rs i ty o f C a l if o r ni a P re s s, J o ur n a ls D i vi s io n , 2 0 0 0 C e nt e r S t ,

S t e 3 0 3 , B e r k e l e y , C A 9 4 7 0 4 - 1 2 2 3 , U S A

R h e t o r i c a l T h e o r y i n S i x t e e n t h - C e n t u r y S p a i n :A C r i t i c a l S u r v e y

Abstract: D u r i n g t h e l a s t t h i r t y y e a r s , a g r o w i n g s c h o l a r l y a t t e n t i o n

h a s b e e n p a i d t o S p a n i s h r h e t o r i c . T h i s p a p e r g i v e s a n o v e r v i e w o f

t h e m a i n s t u di e s o n t h e s u b je c t a n d , w i t h de t a il e d b i b li o gr ap h ic a lr ef ere nc e, dr aw s a p ic tu re w hi c h p re se nt s t he m ai n f ea tu re s o f

S p a n i s h r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r y i n t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y . T h u s , r e f e r e n c e s

a re m ade t o t he C ou nc i l o f Tre nt a nd i ts en co ura gi ng o f s ac re d

r he t o ri c , t o t h e w e ig ht o f C i c ero n ia n is m a m o ng S p a n is h rh et o ri c ia n s

– a l b ei t s o me e xc e p ti o ns – , t o t h e r i gi d d et a c h me nt b e t we en r he t o ri c

a n d p o et ic s, t o t he re la t iv el y h ig h p ro du c ti on o n t he s u bj ec t a n d

t o t he l im it ed i n u en ce o f rh et or ic a nd c la ss ic al le ar nin g i n t he

t e a c h i n g o f t h e t i m e .

In a n a rt icl e pu bl is hed in t he r st number of Rhetorica,n ow n i ne te en y ea r s a g o,1 James J. Murphy sta ted his hopet ha t t he p ub li s hi ng o f d iv e rs e s tu d ie s o n d i ff ere nt a r ea s

o f r h e t o r i c — h i s t o r i c a l , r e g i o n a l , c o n c e p t u a l — w o u l d , i n d u e c o u r s e ,“ p r o v i d e u s t h e p i e c e s f o r a k i n d o f m o s a i c t h a t w i l l f o r m t h e b a s i s

f or a h is to ry o f r he to ri c. ”2 M ur ph y ’ s a f rm a t io n h as p ro v ed r ig ht ,a nd t he f ea tu re s of s uc h a p os si bl e g ene ra l h is to ry o f r het or ic a ren ow fa r be tt er k no w n, i n n um be r a nd d et a il , t ha n w he n h e w ro tet ho s e w o rd s . O ne m a y w on d er, h o we v er, w he th er t h e i nc re a si n ga mo un t o f k no w led ge a cc um ul at ed o n t he m o st v ar ied a sp ect s o f th e s ub jec t m a kes t he ta s k ea si er o r w het he r w e a re fa c ed w it h t hei nc o m m en s ur a b il i ty o f t he m o s a ic w i s hed f or b y M u rp h y, w h o a l s o

1 J. J. Murphy, “The Historiography of Rhetoric: Challenges and Opportunities,”Rhetorica 1 ( 19 83 ) p p. 1 –8 .

2 J. J. Murphy, “The Historiography,” p. 5.







R H E T O R I C A134

s po k e a b o ut “ o ne t h ou s a n d n eg le c te d a u th o r s”3 i n a n a r t i c l e w h e r et h e ‘ t h o u s a n d ’ o f t h e t i t l e e v i d e n t l y h a d m y t h i c a l r e s o n a n c e s w h i c ha ll ud ed t o a n ev en h igh er n um ber. A ny ho w, I a m c on vi nc ed t ha tthere a re plent y o f rea so ns f or opt im ism a nd t ha t t he t as k o f ma pp ing

rh et o r ic b o th s y st e ma t i ca l l y a n d h i st o r ic a l ly i s b ec o mi n g m o re a n dm or e a t ta i na b le . T hi s p a pe r i s t h us d ev ot ed t o a pi ec e o f r he to r ic ’sm o s ai c , n a m el y, r he to r ic a l t h eo r y i n s i xt e en th -c e nt u ry S pa i n. A f ewre m a rk s , h o we v er, m u st b e m a d e b ef o re d a t a c a n b e e x po un d ed a n dt h e d e s c r i p t i o n b e g u n .

F ir st, I a m c on cer ne d h ere on ly w it h rh et or ic al t he or y; t ha t i s,t ho s e a u t ho r s a n d h a nd bo o k s w h ic h ex p l a in , e v en i f w i th c o n si d er-a bl e v a ri a ti on , t he s ys t em o f r he to r ic o r s om e o f i t s p a rt s , a n d w hi c hp u t i n t h e i r r e a d e r s ’ h a n d s t h e p r e c i s e p r i n c i p l e s , r u l e s a n d o r i e n t a -t io n s re qu i re d f or t h e p r o d uc t io n o f t e xt s w i th c er t a in c h ar a c t er is t i cs .T he re fo r e, I fo c us n ei th e r o n r he to r i ca l p ra c t ic e i t se l f, w h ic h w a s o f c o ur s e c o ns t a nt l y p re s en t b o th i n p re a ch in g4 a n d l it er a tu re , n or o nt he b ul k o f s tu d ie s w hi c h a n al yz e , f ro m d iff er en t a pp ro a ch es , t hei n ue nc e o f rh et or i c i n t he l it er ar y pr od uc ti o n o f S pa i n’ s s o -c a ll edG o l d e n A g e . 5

T h e r es ul t i ng corpus, a s a lwa ys w he n c ho os ing a n o bj ect o f s tu dy,i mp li es s o me p ro bl em s o f d el im i ta ti o n. T hi s i s m or e s o i n a c a se l ik et h i s o n e , i n w h i c h m a n y o f t h e s t u d i e d w o r k s w e r e w r i t t e n i n L a t i na n d t hu s a d d res s ed t o a n a u di en ce w h ic h w a s n o t m ere ly Sp a ni s h,a n d v i c e v e r s a : i t g o e s w i t h o u t s a y i n g t h a t t h e p o t e n t i a l r e a d e r s o f ah an db oo k o f r het or ic w ri tt en i n L at in c ou ld c ho os e a mo ng a w id e

3 J. J. Murphy, “One Thousand Neglected Authors: The Scope and Importanceo f R e n ai s sa n c e R h e to r ic , ” i n M u r ph y e d ., Renaissance Eloquence: Studies in the Theoryand Practice of Renaissance Rhetoric (B e rk e le y : U ni ve r si t y o f C a li f or n i a P re s s, 1 9 8 3 )p p . 2 0 – 3 6 .

4 O n rh et o ri c a n d p re a ch in g in s ix te en t h- a n d s ev en te en th -c en tu ry S pa in , s eeth e w or ks c it ed i n n ote 1 1 b el ow a nd F. H er re ro S a lg a do , Aportacio n bibliogra ca a

la oratoria sagrada espan ola ( M a d r id : C o n se j o S u pe r io r d e I n ve s ti g a ci o ne s C i en tõcas,1 9 71 ) , wh ic h id e nt i e s , c la ss i e s a n d c at a lo g ue s a b ou t 5 . 3 0 0 s er mo ns p ri nt ed i n S p ai nf r o m t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y t o t h e b e g i n n i n g s o f t h e t w e n t i e t h .

5 T h e r el a ti v el y f e w t re a ti s es o n l et t er -w r it in g a n d h i st o ry - wr i ti n g p u bl i sh e d i nS pa in i n t hi s p er io d a d d re ss f u nd a me nt a l is su es wh ic h g o w ell b ey on d t he s co pe o f t h is p a p er, t h ou g h r h et o ri c a l s o r e ce iv e s s o me a t te n ti on i n t h em . F o r e p is t ol o gr a p hy,s ee t he r ec en t J . Tr ue ba L aw a nd , El arte epistolar en el renacimiento espan ol (Madrid:Ta m es is , 1 9 9 6 ); t he t he or y o f h is to ry -w ri tin g h a s n o t b ee n t he s ub je ct o f a n y r ec en tc o m pr eh e n s iv e s t u d y : f o r a n o v er v i e w w h ic h p r es e n ts g e n e r a l t e n de n c ie s e xe m p li e dw it h s i ng l e a u th o r s, s e e C . S t ro s et z k i, “ G e sc h ic h te u n d G e s ch i ch t en . Z u r P o et ik d e rG e s ch i ch t s sc h r ei b u n g i n d e r s p a n i sc h e n R e n a is s a n c e, ” Antike und Abenland 4 0 ( 1 9 9 4 )p p . 1 5 3 – 6 8 .







R h et o r i c a l T h e or y i n S i x t e en t h -c e n tu r y S p a i n 135

v a ri et y w hi c h, o f c ou r se , i nc l ud ed m an y b oo ks n ei th er w ri t te n i nS pa in n or b y S pa n is h a u th or s . Tw o e xa m pl es t ak en f ro m t he s a mec i t y , V a l e n c i a , w i l l i l l u s t r a t e t h i s p r o b l e m .

T h e r s t o n e i s p r o v i d e d b y t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l o f S p a n i s h b i r t h w h o

a t t ai n ed t he h ig h es t i n ue nc e i n s i xt ee n th -c en t ur y E u ro p e: J u a n L ui sVi ve s ( 14 9 2–1 5 40 ). O ur p oi nt i s: t o w ha t e xte nt c an w e c on si de r Vi ve sa s a S p a n i s h r h e t o r i c i a n ? J u s t b e c a u s e h e w a s b o r n i n V a l e n c i a ? B u tw ha t a bo ut h is c a re er ? S om e c on ta c ts d i d e xi s t b et w een Vi v es a n dS pa in , b ut i t m us t b e ta ke n i nto a c co un t, a s M . B at a il lo n re ma r ks ,t ha t Vi v es r eje ct ed t he c ha i r o f rh et o ri c a t t he U ni v er s it y o f A l ca l awh en i t wa s of fered t o him bec aus e “ he ha d f ou nd his a uthen tich o m e i n B r u g e s . ”6 M o r e o v e r , V i v e s h a d l e f t S p a i n w h e n h e w a s t o oy ou ng t o h a ve re ce iv ed a n y h ig h er ed u ca t io n. T hi s d o es n ot d e ny h isi n u e n c e o n a l o n g s e r i e s o f t h e c u l t u r a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n s o f s i x t e e n t h -c en tu r y S pa i n, a n d o n rh et o ri c a m on g t he m; b ut i t w ou ld b e d if c ul tto c ha ra ct eri ze s uc h i n ue nc e a s m uc h m ore “ Sp an is h” t ha n, f ori ns t a nc e, E r as m u s’ s . Vi v es ’ s w o rk o n r he to r i c7 w a s n ei t he r w r it t eni n S pa in n or, n ee dl es s t o s a y, i n S pa ni sh ; a nd i t wa s n ot a dd re ss edm or e d ir ec tl y t o Sp a ni s h re ad er s t ha n t o F re nc h, E n gl is h o r D u tc h

o n e s .T h e o t h e r e x t r e m e i s e x e m p l i e d b y t h e m u c h l e s s w e l l k n o w n gu re o f M at hi eu L e B os su , o r M at eo B os su lu s,8 w ho w as p ri va tep re ce pt or o f P hi li p I I a n d w ho l a te r t a ug ht d ia l ec ti c a t t he U ni ve r-s it y o f Pa ri s. A lt hou gh s om e m en ti on s c a n b e f ou nd a bo ut h im i nr ef ere nc e w o rk s a nd h e a ch ie ved a c er ta in s uc ce ss i n th e P ar is ia nc ul t ur a l s c en e o f t he l a te s ix t ee nt h c en tu r y, o ne o f h is w r it in gs h a sr ec e iv ed n o a t t en t io n u nt il re ce n tl y: h is Institutionum oratoriarum libri

tres, publi shed i n Va lencia in 15 66 . T ho ugh French i n o ri gi n a nde du c at i o n, B o ss u l us t a ug ht r he t or i c i n Va l e nc i a ; t h e t re a ti s e w h ic ha c co m p a ni ed h i s t ea c hi n g w a s p ub li s h ed o n ly o n ce a n d, l o gi c al l y, i nt h e c i t y w h e r e i t w a s u s e d a s a t e x t b o o k . A l t h o u g h I t h i n k t h a t t h i sd o es n ot b r in g i nt o q ue s ti o n t he p o ss i bi li ty o f t he s u bj ec t “ rh et o ri ci n S p a i n , ” f o r S p a i n i s a c l e a r l y d e n e d c u l t u r a l e n t i t y i n s i x t e e n t h -

6 M . B a t a i l l o n , Erasmo y Espana, 3 r d . r e v . e d n , ( M e x i co : F o n do d e C u lt u ra E c on o-m ic a, 1 9 6 6) p . 1 5 8 .

7 P u b li s he d p re c is e ly i n B r ug e s i n 1 5 3 2 ; t h er e i s a r e ce n t t r a ns l a ti on i n to S p a ni s h by A. I. Camacho, which includes the latin text edited by G. Mayans in 1782 and av al ua b le i nt ro du ct or y s tu dy b y E . H id a lg o S er n a ( pp . v ii- x li x) : J . L . Vi ves , El arte reto rica

/ De ratione dicendi ( M a d r i d : A n t h r o p o s , 1 9 9 8 ) .8 F u ll t re at me n t o f th is gu re , w hi ch i s t h e o nl y a va i la b le s o urc e, in A . L . L uj an

A t ie n z a , “ L a Reto rica h a ll a da d e M a te o B o ss ul o, ” Revista de Literatura 6 0 ( 19 98 ) p p. 3 1–43.








c e n t u r y E u r o p e , i t d o e s u n d e r l i n e , h o w e v e r , t h e n e e d t o t a k e a l w a y si nt o a c c ou n t t h e b r oa d er E u ro p ea n c o n te x t. T h us , w e w i l l b e d ea l i ngw i t h t e x t s p r o d u c e d i n S p a i n b u t n o t e x c l u s i v e l y b y S p a n i a r d s , a n dw h i c h a d d r e s s e d p r i m a r i l y b u t n o t o n l y a S p a n i s h a u d i e n c e .

A s st at ed in t he t itl e, my ai m i s t o prov ide a gener al sur vey,a nd , a s f ar a s p os si bl e, t o a voi d wh at M ur ph y c a ll s “ a rg ume nt b ysynecdoche”9 a nd even “t he s in of synecdoche,” 10 t h at i s , t o c ha r ac te ri zet h e w h o l e o f S p a n i s h s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y r h e t o r i c b y a l i m i t e d n u m b e ro f g u re s , h ow e ve r i n u en t ia l o r a l l eg ed l y “ re pre s en ta t i ve ” t h ey m a y

be. Despite this comprehensive at tempt, I hav e als o tried to avoi dt h e o p p o s i t e e x t r e m e , w h i c h w o u l d p r e v e n t a n y d e s c r i p t i o n b e y o n dm e r e e n u m e r a t i o n . I h a v e t h u s r e d u c e d t h e a p p e a r a n c e i n t h e m a i nt ex t o f p ro pe r n a me s , b ot h o f m od er n s c ho l ar s a n d o f R e na i ss a nc eau tho rs , t o w hat I c on si der a rea so na bl e m ini mu m, so tha t t hes epages d o no t ac qui re t he for m o f a ser ies o f li sti ngs o f unfa mil ia rn a m e s ; a l l s u c h d e t a i l e d r e f e r e n c e s , o l d a n d m o d e r n , a r e c o n n e d t ot h e f o o t n o t e s .

F i na l l y, t h ere i s a d e bt w hi c h m u st b e e xp l ic i tl y a c kn o w le dg ed :t hi s p ap er w ou ld n ot ha ve be en p os si bl e w it ho ut s ev era l s tu di es

p ubl is he d i n th e la st t hi rt y ye ar s o r s o. A s i n ot he r p art s o f t he w or ld ,i nt er es t i n R e n a i s sa n c e r he to r ic s pr a ng u p i n S p a i n i n t he l a te s i xt i es ,a nd h as n ev er ce as ed t o g ro w s in ce .11 O r t o p u t i t i n a n o t h e r w a y :

9 J. J. Murphy, “The Historiography,” p. 3.10 J. J. Murphy, “One Thousand,” p. 23.11 A f t e r t h e i l l u s t r i o u s a n d i n u e n t i a l p r e c e d e n t o f M . M e n e n d e z P e l a y o , Historia

de las ideas esteticas en Espana, 4 t h e d n ( M a dr i d : C o n s e jo S u p er io r d e I n ve s ti g ac i on e sCientõ ca s , 1 9 74 ) v ol . I p p. 6 2 3 –8 1 , rs t p ub li sh ed in t he l at e n in e te en th c en t ur y, w eh a ve t h e f o ll o wi n g t it l es w h ic h d e se r ve m e n ti on : A . M a r tõ, La preceptiva retorica espanolaen el siglo de Oro ( M a d r id : G r ed o s, 1 9 7 2 ); J . R i co Ve rd u, La reto rica espanola de los siglosXVI y XVII , ( M a dr i d: C o n se j o S u pe r io r d e I n ve s ti g a ci on e s C i en tõcas, 1973); L. LopezG r i g e r a , “ I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e S t u d y o f R h e t o r i c i n S i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y S p a i n , ” Dispositio2 2 –2 3 ( 19 8 3 ) p p. 1 –1 8 ; D . P. Ab b ot , “ La R et or ica y e l R en a cim ie n to : A n O ve rv ie wo f S pa n is h T h eo r y, ” i n J . J . M u rp hy e d ., Renaissance Eloquence, pp. 9 5 –1 04 ; L. LopezGrigera, La retorica en la Espana del Siglo de Oro ( S a l a m a n ca : U n i ve r s id a d d e S a l a m a n c a ,

1 9 9 4 ); L . A l bu r qu e rq u e G a rcõa, El arte de hablar en pu blico. Seis reto ricas famosas (Madrid:

Vi so r, 1 9 9 5 ) ; E . A r ta z a , El “Ars narrandi” en el siglo XVI espanol: teor´ õa y practica (Bilbao:Un iv er si da d d e De us to , 1 9 8 9 ); J . A . H e rn an d ez G u er re ro - M . C . G a rcõa Tejera, Brevehistoria de la reto rica ( M a d ri d : Sõn t es is , 1 9 9 4 ) p p . 1 0 2 –1 0 5 ; t h e f o ll o wi n g p r oc ee d in g sa n d c o l l ec ti v e v o lu me s a l so c o nt a in s t ud i es a l l o f w h ich a r e n o t e x pl ic it l y c it e d h e re ,

w h ic h t h o ug h d e a li n g w i th m o re m i n ut e d e ta i ls a r e c on t r ib u t io n s w or t h c on s i de r in ga n d c a n p ro v id e a p a n or a m ic o v er vi e w: J . M . M a es t re M a e st re et al. e d s , Humanismo

y Pervivencia del mundo cla sico I (Alcan i z - C a d i z : I n st i tu to d e E s tu d io s Tu r ol e ns e s- U ni ver sid ad d e C adi z, 1 99 3 ); E . S an ch e z S a l o r et al. e d. , La recepcio n de las artes

cla sicas en el siglo XVI (Cace re s: Un iv er si da d d e E x tre ma d ur a , 1 9 9 6) ; J . M . M a es tr e








sev era l s cho la rs ha ve rea d a ser ies of t ext s tha t v er y f ew peopl eh ad r ea d f or c en tu ri es , a nd t he y h av e o ff er ed u s t he r es ul t o f s uchr ea d i ng s i n t he f or m o f d o ze ns o f b oo ks a n d a r ti c le s p ub li sh ed i n t hel a s t t h r e e d e c a d e s . B e s i d e s , t h e t e x t s t h e m s e l v e s a r e n o w , t o a c e r t a i n

e xt en t, m or e a cc es s ib le , a n d s ev e ra l t re a ti s es h a ve b ee n p ub li s he d

Maestre et al. e d s , Humanismo y Pervivencia del Mundo Cla sico II. Homenaje al ProfesorLuis Gil, (Alcaniz - Cadiz: Ayuntamiento de Alcaniz - Universidad de Cadiz, 1997 ); I.

Paraõs o e d. , Reto ricas y poe ticas espan olas (siglos XVI-XIX): L. de Granada, Rengifo, Artiga, Hermosilla, R. de Miguel, Mila y Fontanals ( Va l l a d o li d : U n i ve r s i da d d e Va l l a d o li d , 2 0 0 0 ) .

T h e r e c e n t A . A z a u s t r e - J . C a s a s , Manual de reto rica espan ola ( B a rc el o n a : A r i el , 1 9 9 7 ) ,d e sp i te i ts t it l e, d e a ls w i th S p a ni s h r h et o r ic o n ly i n t h at e v er y t ro p e, g ur e a n d topos

i n t h e l o ng l is t w h ich c o ns t it u te s t h e w or k , i s i l lu s tr a t ed w i th e x a mp l es f ro m S p a n is hl it er a tu re . A no th er v er y re ce nt a rt icl e o ff er s a n ew li st o f rh e to ric ia n s a n d wo r ks , b a se dm a in ly o n L op ez G r ig e ra b ut b ot h e n la rg e d w it h s om e n a me s a nd r es tr ic te d t o th eh ol di ng s o f t h e N a ti on a l L i b ra r y a t M a dr id , a n d a n no un ce s a l ar ge e di ti ng p ro je ct , b o th

c on ve nt io na l a n d e le ct ro ni c, o f a g re at n um b er o f t re at is es : M . A . G a r rid o - A . L . L u ja n- L . Al bu rq ue rq ue - M . A . M ar tõn e z , “ R e to r i c a s e s p a no l a s d e l s i g l o X V I e n l a B i b li o t e caN a c io n a l d e M a d ri d ,” Revista de Filolog´ õa Espan ola 7 8 ( 1 9 98 ) p p. 3 2 7 –5 1 . A s u mm a r iz e dg en er a l p a no r am a i s a l so p ro vid ed b y A. M a rtõn J i me n e z , “ L a l it e ra t u ra e n l o s t r at a d osespano les d e re to r ic a d el s ig lo X VI , ” Rhetorica 1 5 ( 1 99 7 ) p p . 1 –3 9 , wh o p a ys s pec ia l

a t te n ti o n t o t h e a t t i tu d e t o w a rd s l it e ra t ur e t o b e f o un d i n t h es e t re a ti s es ; s e e a l s o D .B r ie s em e is t er, “ R he t or i k u n d H um a n is m u s i n S p a ni e n, ” i n H . F. P le t t e d ., Renaissance-Rhetorik / Renaissance Rhetoric, ( B er l in : Wa l te r d e G r uy t e r, 1 9 9 3 ) p p. 9 2 – 1 06 . O n s a cre d

r h et o ri c, s e e H . D . S m i t h, Preaching in the Spanish Golden Age ( O xf o rd : O xf o r d U n i ve r it yP re s s , 1 9 7 8 ) ; F. C e r dan , “ H i s t or i a d e l a h i s t or i a d e l a O r a t o ri a S a g r a d a e s p a no l a e n e lS i gl o d e O r o. I n tr o du cc io n c rõt ic a y b ib l io g ra ca,” Critico n 3 2 ( 19 8 5 ) p p . 5 5 –1 0 7; F.H e r r e r o S a l g a d o , La oratoria sagrada en los siglos XVI y XVII , v o l. I ( M a d r i d : F u n d a c ionU ni ve r s it a r ia E s p ano la , 1 9 9 6 ); a l so b y t h e s a m e a u t ho r, t h e s e co n d v ol u me o f t h e ci t edw o rk , d e vo t ed t o D o m in i ca n a n d F r a nc i sca n p r ea c he r s, p u b li s h ed in 1 9 9 8 ; t h er e i s a

t h ir d a n d l a s t v o lu m e f o rt h co m in g w h ic h wi ll d ea l w it h p re a ch e r s f r om o t h er o rd e r s; J .Arag ues Alda z, ‘Deus concionator’. Mundo predicado y retorica del ‘exemplum’ en los SiglosdeOro ( Am s te rd a m: R o do pi , 1 9 9 9 ). O n l a te r p er io d s o f r he to ri c i n S pa in , s ee D. P. Ab b ot ,“ An to n io d e C a pm a ny ’s T h eo ry o f H um a n N a tu re ,” i n B . Vi ck e rs e d. , Rhetoric Revalued

( B in g h a mt o n N Y: C e n te r f o r M e d ie v a l a n d E a r ly R e n ai s sa n c e S t u d ies , 1 9 8 2 ) p p. 1 4 9 –5 6 ; D . P. A b bo tt, “ A B ib li og r a ph y o f E ig h te en th - a n d N in et ee nt h- C en tu r y S pa n is hTreatises,” Rhetorica 4 ( 198 6 ) p p. 2 75 –9 2 a nd R . M . Ar ad ra S anchez, De la reto rica a

la teor´ õa de la literatura (siglos XVIII y XIX) ( M u rc ia : U n iv e rs i da d d e M u rc ia , 1 9 9 7 ) ;o n e o f t h e m o st i m po r ta n t e i gh t ee n th - ce n tu r y t r ea t i se s w a s e d it e d i n a n e x em p la r yw ay b y A . M es tr e S an chõs i n 1 98 4: A. M ay a ns S is ca r, Obras completas, III. Reto rica

( Ol iv a : Ay u nt am ie nt o d e O li va , 1 9 8 4 ) ( s ee re vi ew b y R . J . G a b in , Rhetorica 5 ( 19 87 )p p. 1 9 8 –2 0 6) a nd is th e s ub je ct o f D . P. A bb ot t, “ Ma y a ns ’ Rheto rica a n d t h e S e a r c h f o ra S p a ni s h R h et o ri c ,” Rhetorica 1 1 ( 19 93 ) p p. 1 57 –7 9; s ee a l so I . P ar aõs o e d. , Reto ricas y poe ticas espan olas. O n r h et o ri c i n S p a n is h A m e ri ca , s e e I . O s o ri o R o m er o , “ L a r e t orica

en Nueva Espana,” Dispositio 2 2 –2 3 ( 1 9 83 ) p p . 6 5 –8 6 ; f or a b ri ef t re a tm en t o f m a jo r gu re s, s ee M . B eu ch o t P ue nt e, Reto ricos de la Nueva Espan a (Mexi c o : U n i ve r s id a dN a c io n a l A u t on om a d e M ex ic o, 1 9 96 ) ; s e e a ls o , lo n ge r i n e xt en si on a n d d e ep er i nd e ta i l, D . P. A b b ot t , Rhetoric in the New World. Rhetorical Theory and Practice in ColonialSpanish America ( C o lu m b i a : U n i v er s i t y o f S o u t h C a r o l in a , 1 9 9 6 ) .








a n d t r a n s l a t e d i n m o d e r n e d i t i o n s .12 M o re ov e r, i t i s p rec i se ly a ll t h isc ri t ic al a t te nt i on p a id t o t h e s ub je ct w h ic h, w e t hi nk , j us t i es t hi sp a p e r a n d a c c o u n t s f o r i t s u s e f u l n e s s .

I n o n e o f t h e s e s t u d i e s , L . L o p ez G r i ge ra p o s es s ev er a l q ue s ti o ns

a b o u t s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y S p a n i s h r h e t o r i c , a n d t h e g e n e r a l c o m p l a i n ta bo ut th e l ac k o f a co ns is te nt c at al og ue o f a ut ho rs a nd w or ks c an

be heard once more. Howev er, tha nks to the work carried out byLo p ez G r ig er a h er s el f, t o t h e m a n y s tu d ie s e nc o ur a ge d b y h er a n d t os ev er a l o th er s a l re ad y m en t io ne d , w e a re n ow i n a p o si ti o n t o a t te mp ts e v e r a l a n s w e r s t o h e r q u e s t i o n s i n a m o r e p r e c i s e w a y t h a n w o u l dh a v e b e e n p o s s i b l e , s a y , f t e e n y e a r s a g o . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e r e i s s t i l lm uc h re se ar ch t o be d on e a nd o ur d es cr ip ti on w il l be n ec es sa ri lyi m p r o v e d i n t h e c o m i n g y e a r s .

T he d es c ri pt io n o f s u ch a n i te m a s “ s ix t een t h- c en t ur y S pa n is hrh et o ri ca l t heo r y” c a n b e p ut i n to e ff ec t f ro m t wo c om p le m en ta r y

12 T h ere i s a v er y v al ua b le a n th ol og y o f d if fe re n t p a ss a ge s f ro m a w id e va r ie tyo f a ut ho rs , a rr an ge d b y s ub je ct m at te r a nd tr an sl ate d in to S pa nis h ( wit ho ut t heL a ti n o r ig i n al ) : E . A r ta z a , Antolog´ õa de textos reto ricos espan oles del siglo XVI (Bilbao:

Un i ve r si d a d d e D eu s to , 1 9 9 7 ) . We a l so h a v e e d it i on s o f i n di vi d ua l a u t ho r s a n d w o rk ss u ch a s t h e b i b li c al s ch o l ar B e ni t o A r ia s M o n ta n o : B . A r i a s M o n ta n o , Los Rhetoricorumlibri quattuor, i n t ro d u ct i o n , c r i ti c a l e d it i o n a n d n o t e s b y M . V. P er e z C u s t od i o ( B a d a joz

- Cad i z : D i p u ta c i on P ro vi nc ia l d e B a da jo z - U ni ve rs id a d d e C ad iz , 1 9 8 4) ; B . A ria sMontano, Tractatus de guris rhetoricis cum exemplis ex sacra scriptura petitis, t r a n s l a t i o na nd n ot es b y L. G om ez C an se co a nd M . A . M arq u e z G u e rr er o ( H ue l va : U n iv er s id a d d eH u el v a, 1 9 9 5 ); t h e r st a u th o r w h o w r o te a n d p ub l is he d a t r e a ti s e i n S p a ni s h, M i g ue ld e S a lin a s: E . C a s as , La reto rica en Espana ( M a dr id : E d it or a N a ci on a l, 1 9 8 0) p p. 3 9 –2 00 ; a n ew a nd m uc h b et te r e di tio n i n M . d e S al in as , Rhetorica en lengua castellana,

e dit io n, i nt ro du ct io n a n d n o te s b y E . S an c h ez G a r cõa ( N a p o li : I s t i tu t o U n i ve r s it a r i oO r ie n ta l e, 1 9 9 9 ) ; t h e l e a di n g g r a m ma t ic a l a n d r h et o ric a l t h eo r is t o f t h e s e co n d h a l f o f s i xt ee n th - c en t ur y S p a in , F r a n ci sc o S an ch e z “ e l B ro ce ns e” : F r an ci sc o S an ch ez d el a s B r o z a s , Obras I. Escritos retoricos; i n t r o d u c t i o n , t r a n s l a t i o n a n d n o t e s b y E u s t a q u i oSan c h e z S a l o r a n d C e s a r C h a pa r ro G om e z ( C aceres: Institucio n C u l t u r a l E l B r o c e n s e ,1 9 8 4 ) ; t h e P l a t on i s t S e b a s t ia n F o x M o r ci l lo : V. P i n ed a , La imitacion como arte literarioen el siglo XVI espanol (con una edicio n y traduccio n del dia logo De imitatione de Sebastia n

Fox Morcillo) ( S e v i l la : D i p ut a c i on P ro v in ci a l, 1 9 9 4 ) ; t h e H e r mo g e ne a n A n to n io L ul i oo r L lu ll : A . L ul io , Sobre el estilo: libro sexto del Sobre el discurso , i n tr o du c ti o n, t ex t a n dtr a n sla ti on b y A . S a nc ho R o yo ( H ue lv a : U ni ve rs id a d d e H u elv a , 1 9 9 7 ). T h ere a re

a l s o u n p u b l is h e d d o c to r a l d i s se r t a ti o n s w h i c h i n c lu d e s e v er a l t e xt s a n d t r a n s l at i o n s:A. L . L uj an Ati enz a o n t he ci ty o f Va le nci a a nd th e gure s o f Pe dro J ua n N uneza n d J u a n L o r e n zo P a lm ir en o ( r ewo r k e d in A . L . L uj an A ti e nz a , Reto ricas espanolas delsiglo XVI: el foco de Valencia ( M a d r i d : C o n s e jo S u p e r i o r d e I n v e s t i g a c i o n e s C i e n tõcas,1 9 9 9 )) ; L . A lb u rq u er q u e G a rcõa o n s e v er a l s u cc es s iv e h o ld e rs o f t he c ha i r o f r he to ri c a tt h e U ni v er s it y o f Al c al a d e H e n a r e s ; J . G o n z al ez V az q u e z a n d M . M u no z L op e z o nth e D om in ica n L u is d e G r an a da a n d t w o o f h is wo r ks , t h e wi de ly k no wn RhetoricaEcclesiastica a n d t h e m o re t e ch n ic a l t o pi c -s o ur ce Silvadelugarescomunes ; F . G r a u C o d i n a( U ni ve r si d a d d e Va l en c ia , 1 9 9 5 ) o n t h e w h o le o f P. J . N un ez’s work s.








a n d s o m e w h a t c o n t r a d i c t o r y p o i n t s o f v i e w . T h e e m p h a s i s c a n r e l yo n d i a c h r o n i c e v o l u t i o n , a n d w e w o u l d t h e n h a v e a n a r r a t i o n o f t h ec ha n ge s t ha t r he to ri c u nd er we nt i n t h e c h os e n p er io d . O n e m i gh t,a l so , c o nc e nt ra te o n t he c om m on c ha ra c te ri st ic s , n ot o n t he c ha n gi ng

o n e s , a n d d r a w a m o r e o r l e s s s t a t i c p i c t u r e o f t h e s t r u c t u r e t h a t t h es y s t e m o f r h e t o r i c p r e s e n t e d a t t h a t t i m e .

T he re i s a f ru i tf u l a t t em p t i n L op ez G r ig er a ’s w o r k t o o r ga n iz et h e w id e m a t er ia l o f s i x te en t h- ce n tu r y S pa n is h r he t or i c a c co r di ng t ot h e s e t w o o b v i o u s p e r s p e c t i v e s . F i r s t , s h e p a y s a t t e n t i o n t o c o n t e n t ,a n d s e es t w o g en er a l t re nd s : a c l as s ic i st o n e, i n t u rn s ub d iv id ed i nt oC ic e ro n i an s , R a m is t s a n d A nt i ci c er on i a n s, a n d a n o th er o n e c h ar a c -t e r i z e d b y t h e i n u e n c e o f B y z a n t i n e d o c t r i n e . A s w e l l a s t h i s “ s y s -t em a t ic ” o r “ s yn c hr on i c” d es c r ip ti o n, L op ez G r ig er a a l s o p ro po s est he d i ac hr on ic d i st ri bu t io n o f s i xt e en th -c en tu r y a u th o rs i nt o ve s u c-c es s i v e g en er a t io n s o f r he to r i ci a ns , ju s t i fy in g c o n ta c t s b et w ee n t h ed i f f e r e n t m e m b e r s o f e a c h o n e w h e n a g e d o e s n o t t s t r i c t l y . 13

I n t h e f o l l o w i n g p a g e s , I w i l l p a y b r i e f a t t e n t i o n t o t h e d i f f e r e n ta sp ec ts o f Sp an is h s ix te en th -c en tu ry a bo ut w hi ch w e h av e m or ep r e c is e in f o r m at io n .

T he p re ce d en t s o n w hi c h s i xt e en t h- c en tu r y r he to r ic w a s n ec es -sa ril y bas ed a nd the f ea tures and even t he ver y exi stenc e o f hu -m a n i s m i n f te e nt h - ce n t u ry S pa i n — o r, b et t e r, C a s t i l e —a r e s u bj e ct sw hi ch h a v e c au se d d eb at es ov er t he l a s t d ec ad es , a nd t hi s i s n o p la c et o d e a l w i t h t h e m .14 W h i c h e v e r p o s i t i o n o n e a d o p t s o n t h e s e i s s u e s ,

13 L . L o p e z G r i g e r a , La retorica espanola . . . , p p. 5 7 –6 0 , g ro up s t h e d iff er en t a u t h or s

a s f o ll o ws : t h e r s t g e n er a ti o n w o ul d co n s is t o f A n to n io d e N eb r ij a ( 1 4 4 4 –1 5 2 2 ) a n dF e rn a n d o A l o ns o d e H e rr e ra ; t h e s e co n d , o f J u an L u is Vi v es ( 1 4 9 2–1 5 4 0 ), A lf o n so d eValdes ( 1 49 0 –1 5 3 2 ) a nd J u an G in es d e S e p ul v e d a ( c . 1 4 9 0 – 1 5 7 3 ) ; t h e t h i r d o f A n t o n i oL u l io ( ? - 1 5 8 2 ) , J u a n L o r e nz o P a l m ir e n o ( 1 5 2 1 –1 5 8 0 ) a n d A n d r es S e m p er e ( p re c is e d a t e su nk n ow n) ; t he fo ur th o f P ed ro J ua n N unez (1522–1602), Sebastian F o x M or ci ll o ( 1 5 2 6–1 5 6 0 ) , F a d r i qu e F u r i o C e r i o l ( 1 5 2 7 –1 5 9 2 ) , C i p ri a n o S u ar ez ( c . 1 5 2 0 – 15 9 3 ) , F r a n c i sc oSan ch ez d e l a s B ro z as ( 1 5 23 –1 6 0 1 ) a n d B e nit o A ri as M o nt an o ( 1 5 27 –1 5 9 8 ); t he f tha nd l as t o f M ar tõn d e S e gu ra ( pre cis e d a te s u nk n ow n) , Vi cen t e B la s G a rcõa ( 1 5 5 1 – 1 6 1 6 )a n d B a r to l om e B r a v o ( 1 5 5 4 – 1 6 0 7 ) .

14 T h e t wo e x tr em e o p p os e d o p in i o ns c a n b e r e pr es e nt e d b y t h e “ op t im i st ic ” O .

D i C a m il lo , El humanismo castellano del siglo XV ( Va l e n ci a : F e r n a n d o To r r e s, 1 9 7 6 ) ,s um ma ri ze d i n p ar t i n O . D i C am il lo , “H um an is m in S pa in , ” i n A. R ab il J r. e d. ,Renaissance Humanism: Foundations, Forms and Legacy ( P h i l ad e l ph i a : P e n ns y l v a n iaU ni ve rs it y P re ss , 1 9 8 8) vo l. I I, p p. 5 5 –1 0 8 a n d th e “ pe ss im is tic ” L . G il F er n andez,“ E l p r ece d en t e m e d ie v a l c a st e ll a no , ” i n F e rn andez, Panorama social del humanismo

espan ol (1500–1800), 2 n d e d n ( M ad r id : Te cn o s, 1 9 95 ) p p. 2 7 –4 7 ; t h e re i s a n e xc ell en ts yn t he sis , w it h r ef ere nc e t o a ll re le va n t b ib li og r ap h y, in N . G . R ou nd , “ F if te en th -C e n tu r y C u lt u ra l C h a n ge , ” i n R o un d , Libro llamado F e d r on. Plato’s Phaedo translatedby Pedro Diaz de Toledo ( L o nd o n : Ta m e si s B o ok s , 1 9 9 3 ) p p. 6 2 –7 6 .








a nd t hou gh w e ha ve s om e s tu di es w hi ch s ho w t he v it al it y o f Sp an is hm e d i e v a l r h e t o r i c ,15 i t s e e m s t h a t t h e r h e t o r i c b a s e d o n t h e n e w i m -p ul se o f h um an is m a pp ea re d i n S pa in a s a r el at iv el y l at e a nd i so la te dp he no me no n . I n a re cen t c a ta l o gu e o f a l l w o rk s o n rh et or i c d a ti n g

f r o m t h e incunabula p e r io d,16 o n l y o n e t i t l e p r i n t e d i n S p a i n a p p e a r s :F. M a n zan ar e s ’ Flores rhetorici, p u b l i s h e d i n S a l a m a n c a a b o u t 1 4 8 8 .17

F or h um a ni st r he t or i c i n S pa i n, a s f o r m a ny o th e r e le me nt s r el a te dt o h u m a n i s m , o n e h a s t o w a i t u n t i l A n t o n i o d e N e b r i j a ( 1 4 4 4 – 1 5 2 2 ) ,w ho , a s J . J. M ur ph y p oi nt s o ut ,18 p u b l i s h e d a w o r k o n r h e t o r i c o n l yi n h i s s e v e n t i e s .19

15 C h . B . F a u l h a b e r, “ R e t or i ca s c l as i c as y m e d i ev a l e s e n b i b l io t e c a s c a s t el la n a s , ” A baco 4 ( 19 7 2 ) p p . 1 5 1–3 0 0 ; C h . B . F a ul ha b er, Latin rhetorical theory in thirteenth and fourteenth century Castile ( B e r ke l e y : U n i v e r si t y o f C a l i f o rn i a P r e ss , 1 9 7 2 ) .

16 J. J. Murphy - M. Davies, “Rhetorical Incunabula: A S h or t- Ti tle C a ta lo g ue o f T e x t s P r i n t e d t o t h e Y e a r 1 5 0 0 , ” Rhetorica 1 5 ( 19 9 7 ) p p. 3 5 5 –4 7 4 .

17 J. J. Murphy - M. Davies, “Rhetorical Incunabula, ” p . 4 14 . F or a b ri ef d es cr ip -ti on o f i ts c on te nt s, s ee J . R ic o Ve rd u, La retorica espanola . . ., pp. 15 3–5 5. On thisa ut ho r, s ee a ls o t he s tu di es o f T. Ar co s P er eir a , “ L a p re se nc ia d e Q ui nt ill a no en l os

tratados reto ricos espanoles del s. XV: las Flores retoricas d e F. M a n z an a r es , ” Cuader-nos de Filolog´ õa Cla sica. Estudios Latinos 1 6 ( 19 9 9) p p. 1 75 –1 88 , “ La t eo rõa e p is t ola rd e F e rn a n d o M a n z a na r es , ” Cuadernos de Filolog´ õa Clasica. Estudios Latinos 1 0 ( 19 96 )

p p . 1 7 7 – 9 2 , “ E l De venustate dicendi d e F e r n a n d o M a n z a n a r e s y e l Dia logo de la lenguad e J u an d e Va l d es , ” Fortunatae 9 ( 19 97 ) p p. 1 4 1–60 , a nd “L os Colores rethorici deF er na nd o M an za na re s, ” in J . A . S am pe r P ad ill a - M . Tro y a D en iz e d. , Actas del XI Congreso Internacional de la Asociacion de Lingu´ õstica y Filolog´ õa de la America Latina (LasP al ma s d e G r an C a na r ia : U n i ve rs id a d d e L a s P a lm a s d e G ra n C a na r ia , 1 9 9 9) vo l. 3 ,p p . 2 0 6 1 –7 2 . T h e p r es e n ce o f f o re i gn o r c la s s ic a l a u th o r s’ w or k s o n r h et or i c f ro m t h is

p er i od i n S p a ni s h l i b ra r ie s i s a l so c o mp a r at i ve l y l i mi te d , a s c a n b e s e en i n t h e p ag e so f F. G a rcõa C r a vi o to , Catalogo general de incunables en bibliotecas espanolas (Madrid:M i ni s te r io d e C u lt u ra , 1 9 9 0 ).

18 J. J. Murphy, “Antonio de Nebrija in the European Rhetorical Tradition,” inC . C o d one r - J . A . G o n z al e z I g l e s i a s e d . , Antonio de Nebrija, Edad Media y Renacimiento, Actas del coloquio celebrado en Salamanca, noviembre 1992 ( S a la m a n c a : U n i ve r s i d a d d e

S a l a m a n c a , 1 9 9 4 ) p p . 4 4 7 – 5 5 .19 Artis rhetoricae compendiosa coaptatio ex Aristotele, Cicerone, Quintiliano (Compluti,

1 5 15 ) . T h e wo r k d id n o t e n jo y t he ex p ect ed s uc ce ss a n d wa s re pr in te d o n ly t wi ced u ri n g t h e c e nt u ry, i n 1 5 2 9 ( A lc a la d e H e n ar e s: M i g ue l d e E g uõa ) a nd 1 5 83 ( Gr an ad a:

s . n .) ; s ee M . A . E sp ar za To rre s - H .- J. N ie de re he , Bibliograf´ õa Nebrisense. Las obrascompletas del humanista Antonio de Nebrija desde 1481 hasta nuestros d´ õas (Amsterdam:

John Benjamins, 1999 ) pp. 81, 119 and 166. The eighteenth-century author G. Mayans( me nt io ne d a bo ve , se e n. 11 ) e dit ed i t, wit h t he a dd it io n o f h is o wn no te s a ndco m m en t s, i n 1 7 7 4 ( Va l en c ia : F r a nc i sc o B u rg u et e ). S e e a l s o I . C a b el lo H e r na n d or e na ,“ L a p r e s e n c i a d e Q u i n t i l i a n o e n l a R e t o r i c a d e N e b r i j a , ” i n T . A l b a l a d e j o - E . D e l R õo -

J. A. Caballero eds, Quintiliano: Historia y actualidad de la reto rica (Logron o: Instituto deE s tu di o s R i oj a n os , 1 9 9 8 ) v o l . I I I, p p. 1 1 6 9 –7 9 .








Thing s c ha nged r ad ica ll y a nd qui ckly f rom t ha t t im e, t o thep oi nt t ha t o ne m ig ht s pe ak , i n D on A bb ot t’s w or ds , o f “ a g ol de na g e o f r he to ri c”20 i n t he S pa n is h R e na i ss a nc e. D oz e ns o f rh et o ri c alt re a ti s es w ere p ub li s he d t hro u gh ou t t h e c en tu ry, t he m a jo ri ty o f

w hi ch a re a lrea dy i den ti e d a nd l oc a li zed i n S pa ni sh l ib ra ri es .21

S pa n is h p ro d uc ti o n s ee ms s u rp r is in gl y h i gh , c om pa re d w i th t heli sti ngs o ffered at t he end o f w or ks on Frenc h rheto ri c, suc h a st ho s e b y F um ar o li22 o r M o uc he l, 23 o r w it h w ha t ca n be ex tra ctedf r o m H o w e l l ’ s c l a s s i c s t u d y ,24 e s p e c i a l l y i f o n e t a k e s i n t o a c c o u n t t h em e a g r e p r e c e d e n t s m e n t i o n e d a b o v e .

So me o f th e o ld es t s tud ies o n the s ubjec t ins is t o n the la ck o f o ri gi na l it y t ha t t hi s b od y o f r he to ri c al t h eo r y d is p la ys t hr ou gh o utt h e c e n tu r y. A c c o rd i n g t o R i c o Ve rd u, f o r i n s t a n c e , “ S p a n i s h r h e t o r i cu nd er go e s n o e vo l ut io n , b ec a us e, w i th t h e e xc ep t io n s o f L u is Vi ve sa n d L o re nz o P a lm i re no , n o a u t h o r a i m s t o c re a t e a c o he re n t d o ct r in e( ne it h er t he or ic a l n or p r ac ti ca l ). T he o nl y t hi n g t h at c an b e c le a rl yo b s e r v e d i s a g e n e r a l s t i f f e n i n g i n e v e r y h a n d b o o k . ”25 T h i s v i e w h a si t s e f f e c t o n t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r w h i c h t a k e s u p t h eg r e a t e r p a r t o f R i c o V e r d u’ s w o r k ( p a g e s 7 6 – 2 4 3 ) , w h e r e t h e a u t h o r s

w h os e w o rk s a re d e sc r ib ed a re s i mp l y a r r an g ed a l ph a be ti c a l ly.26

R i c oVerdu’ s c o m p l a i n t , h o w e v e r , c l e a r l y d e r i v e s f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t s o m es ch o la r s l o ok f o r w h at t he y j us t c a nn ot n d. T he s ys t em u su a ll y c a ll ed

20 D . P. A b b ot t , “ L a R e to r i ca y e l R e n ac i mi e nt o ,” c i t. i n n . 1 1 a b o ve , p . 1 0 4 .21 S e e t h e n a l l is t in g s a n d b i b li og r a ph y o f J . R i co Ve r du, La reto rica a n d A . M a r t õ,

La preceptiva retorica, b o th c it . in n . 1 1 a bo ve . M ore s ys te ma t ic a nd co mp le te is t he

i n i t i a l c a t a l o g u e i n R h e t o r i c a l S e m i n a r , “ D a t a f o r m a t , ” Dispositio 2 2 –2 3 ( 1 98 3 ) p p. 1 9 –6 4 . S a tis fa c to r y r es ult s c a n a ls o b e o b ta in ed f ro m a n e le ct ro n ic s ea rc h o f t he k e y w ord s“ rh e to r ic ” a n d “ o r a to r y ” o n t h e S p a ni s h B i bl i og r a ph i ca l H e r it a g e ( ‘ P at r im o n io B i bl i o-graco Espanol’) web page (http://www.mcu.es/ccpb/index.html), which includesn e a rl y a l l o f t h e b o o k s p r i nt e d t o 1 8 5 0 h e ld i n S p a n i sh p u b l ic a n d p r iv a t e l ib r a ri e s.

22 M . F u m a r o l i , L’age de l’eloquence. Rhetorique et “res literaria” de la Renaissance auseuil de l’e poque classique (P a r is : Al b in M i ch e l, 1 9 9 4 = G e n ev e: D ro z , 1 9 8 0 ) p p. 7 4 8–9 4 .

23 C h . M o uc h el , Cice ron et Se neque dans la rhe torique de la Renaissance (Marburg:H i tz e ro t h, 1 9 9 0 ) p p. 4 9 6 –5 5 0 .

24 W . S a m u e l H o w e l l , Logic and Rhetoric in England, 1500–1700 ( P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e -

t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 5 6 ) .25 J. Rico Verdu, La reto rica espan ola, p . 7 5 .26 T he o th er p an or am ic vi ew o f S pa ni sh G old en A ge r he to ri c, A . M ar tõ’s La

preceptiva reto rica, w as p ub lis he d o ne y e ar a ft er R ic o Ve rd u’ s, a nd i t a ls o c on si st so f a s er ie s o f s h or t c ha p te rs d ev ot ed t o a n i nd iv id ua l a u th o r ea c h. M a rtõ, h o w ev e r,d o e s n o t h a v e r e c o u r s e t o a l p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r , b u t h e p r e s e n t s t h e s t u d i e d w o r k s i n ac h ro n o l og i ca l s e q u en c e. I n a d d it i on , h e a l s o i n cl u de s s a cr e d rh e to r ic a u th o r s, t o w h i chRico Verdu h a d d e v o t e d n o a t t e n t i o n .








rhetorica recepta i s w id e a nd ex ibl e e no ugh t o o ff er ev ery a ut ho r ac on si d er ab le r a ng e o f s el ec ti o n a n d o rd er p os s i bi li ti es , b ut i t c er ta in l yh as i ts l im it s .27 M o r eo v e r, t h e elocutio- bi a se d l ea n in g o f m u ch s c ho l ar-s hi p o n rh et or i c s t il l a ff ec ts R i co Ve rd u’s s t ud y, w hi c h d ev o te s a l mo s t

n i n e t y p a g e s t o p r o v i d i n g t h e r e a d e r w i t h a n “ a l p h a b e t i c a l l i s t o f a l l gu re s w hi ch a pp ea r i n t he a ut ho rs d ea lt w it h,”28 o f q u e s ti o n a b leutility.

It is t rue, how ever, t ha t a s ingl e li ne of evo lutio n ca nno t be f ou ndi n S pa n i sh s i x te en th -c e nt u ry r he to r i c: t he d i ff er en t t re nd s c o -e xi s ti n a m o r e o r l e s s c o n i c t i v e w a y . T h e r e i s , n e v e r t h e l e s s , a h i s t o r i c a le ve nt t ha t c o ns i d er a bl y a f fe ct s s o m e a s p ec t s o f rh et o r ic a l t h eo r y: t heC ou nc i l o f Tre nt . O n e o f t he c ou nc i l’s c on cl us i on s w a s t he n ee d f o r ar ef o r m i n p re d i c a ti o n ,29 a n d a lt h ou gh s u ch a n i nt en t io n e ve nt ua l lyy ie ld ed l imi te d re su lts , i t p ro du ce d a s er ies o f e ff or ts i n t he f or mo f r he to r i ca l t re a ti s es , b ot h s a c re d a n d s ec u l a r. To m en t io n j us t t w on a m e s , t h e m o s t c o n s p i c u o u s a m o n g t h e m w e r e t h e t r e a t i s e w r i t t e ni n h e x a me t er s b y t h e b i bl i ca l s c ho l ar B e ni to A ri a s M o n t a no a n d L u i sd e G r a n a d a ’ s Rhetorica ecclesiastica ( o n w h i c h s e e b e l o w ) .

I n m a n y c a s e s , r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r y p r o d u c e d i n S p a i n r e e c t e d t h e

deba tes w hic h or igina ted el sew here. In t he rs t h alf o f t he cen-t ur y, o ne i s su e w a s a t t he v er y c en tr e o f m an y rh et or i ca l q u ar re ls :C ic e r o n ian is m .30

T h e h i s t o r y o f C i c e r o n i a n i s m i n S p a i n i s n o w a d a y s a n e x p l o r e da n d e ve n q u it e w e ll m a pp ed t e rr i to ry. S ev er a l s t ud ie s h a ve s ho w ni ts m a in l in es ,31 a n d t he y c or re ct F um a ro l i’ s “ si n o f synecdoche” a c -

27

T h e p e r sp e c ti v e i n t ro d u c ed b y A . K ib ed i Va r g a , “ R h e to r i c , a S t o r y o r a S y s t e m ?A C h a ll e ng e t o H i st o ri a n s o f R e na i s sa n ce R h et o ri c, ” i n J . J . M u r ph y, Renaissance Elo-quence, p p. 8 4 –9 1 , c a n b e f r ui t fu l h e re . K i bed i Va r g a p r e se n ts t wo d i ff e re n t w a y s o f

co n cei vi ng rh et or ic : a s a s t o ry, w ho s e p ar ts a re h e ar d a n d le a rn t b y t he s tu de nt ; o r a s at im e le s s s y st e m w h er e e v er y p a r t e x is t s s i mu l ta n e ou sl y, r e ga r d le s s o f i t s f o r ma t io np ro ce ss . I n t hi s s en s e, t he “ s to ry ” c a n b e to ld m a ny t im es in d if fe re n t w ay s , a n d i sa lw ay s n ew f or t h os e w ho l is ten t o i t f or t h e rs t t im e . T h is m ig ht p a rt ly a cc ou n t f ort h e m a n y a n d u n a vo i da b l e c o in c id e n ce s b e tw e en a l l t h es e d i ff e re n t h a n d bo o k s.

28 J. Rico Verdu, “Lista alfabetica de todas las guras que aparecen en los autores

c o n s u l t a d o s , ” i n La reto rica espan ola, p p . 2 6 5 – 3 5 1 .29 S ee A . M a r tõ, La preceptiva retorica, p p. 1 11 –1 2 a nd 1 36 –4 1 ; s ee a ls o C h. M o uc he l,

“ L es r h et o r i qu e s p o s t -t r i d en t i n es ( 1 5 7 0 –1 6 0 0 ) : l a f a b r iq u e d ’ un e s o c i ete chre tienne,”in M . F u ma ro li e d. , Histoire de la rhetorique dans l’Europe moderne (1450–1950) (Paris:P re s se s Un i ve r si t ai r es F r a n a i se s , 1 9 9 9 ) pp . 4 3 1 –9 7 .

30 F o r a t ho ro ug h a cc ou nt o f t he m a ni fo ld d im en si on s o f t h is d eb a te , s ee M . L .MacLaughlin, Literary Imitation in the Italian Renaissance: the Theory and Practice of Literary Imitation in Italy from Dante to Bembo ( O xf o r d : C l a r e n d o n P r e s s , 1 9 9 5 ) .

31 T w o r e c e n t s t u d i e s g i v e t h o r o u g h a c c o u n t s o f t h e q u e s t i o n : A . G a r c õa G a l i a n o ,La imitacion poetica en el Renacimiento ( K a s s e l : R e i c h e n b e r g e r - U n i v e r s i d a d d e D e u s t o ,








c or di ng t o w h ic h S p ai n a s a w h ol e w o ul d h a ve b ee n a n ti -C ic e ro n ia n .Q ui te o n t he co nt ra r y, S pa ni sh t he or is ts ca n be f ou nd wi th in t het w o e l d s , a n d t h o u g h t h e r e a r e f u r i o u s r e a c t i o n s a g a i n s t t h e o b s e s -s i v e i m i t a t i o n o f C i c e r o , a m o d e r a t e C i c e r o n i a n i s m w a s t h e l e a d i n g

t re nd i n s ix te en th -c en tu ry S pa i n. D es pi te t h e E r as m ia n l ea n in g o f m a n y S p a n i s h a u t h o r s , l o n g a g o e s t a b l i s h e d b y M . B a t a i l l o n , o r t h o -d o x C i c e r o n i a n i m i t a t i o n w a s t a u g h t f o r d e c a d e s a t t h e u n i v e r s i t i e so f V ale n c ia,32 Alc ala33 a n d S a l a m a n c a ,34 a n d w a s a l s o a d o p t e d b y t h e

jesuit curriculum.35

R a m is m a l s o h a d c o ns i d er a bl e ef fe c t o n S pa n is h a u t ho r s.36 Hu-m an i st s a n d rh et o ri c ia n s l ik e F a dr iq ue F ur i o C e r io l,37 w ho s tu d-

1 99 2) p p. 3 40 –8 2 a nd J . M . N unez Gon zalez, El ciceronianismo en Espana (Valladolid:U ni ve rs id a d d e Va ll a do lid , 1 9 9 3 ); o n t he r ole o f Q ui nt ili an a s a ut ho r it y f or o r a g ai ns t d i -v e rs e d e g re e s o f C i ce ro n i an i sm a n d A n ti c ice r on i an i sm i n F o x M o rc i ll o ’ s , P a l mi re n o ’s ,

Furio C e r io l ’s a n d o t he r a u th o r s’ w o rk s , s e e V. P i ne d a , “ L a h e re n ci a d e Q u i n ti li a no e nl a s t e orõa s e s p an o l a s d e l a imitatio d u ra n te el s ig lo X V I, ” in T. A lb a la d ej o e t a l. e ds ,Quintiliano, c i t . i n n . 1 9 , I I I , p p . 1 4 7 5 – 8 3 a n d M . A . R a bade Navarro, “Ciceronianismom o d e r a d o e i m i t a c i o n e n l a E s pa na d e l X V I : l a s g ur a s d e M a l do n a d o, P a lm i re n o y

Matamoros,” Fortunatae 1 ( 19 9 1 ) p p . 1 9 7 –2 0 8; o n d iff er en t t he or ie s o n numerus a n d t h e i rd e p e n d e n c e o n C i c e r o , s e e J . F e r n an d e z L op e z , “ E l numerus e n l a s r e t o rica s espa n ola sd el S ig lo d e O ro , ” i n J . L uq ue M or en o - P. R . Dõa z y D õa z e d s , Estudios de me trica latina( Gr a na d a : U n iv er si da d d e G ra n a da , 1 9 9 9 ) v ol . I , p p. 3 4 1–5 4 .

32 S e e J . M . N un ez, El ciceronianismo, p p . 7 8 – 8 8 .33 Se e J. M. Nun ez, El ciceronianismo, p p . 9 5 – 1 0 3 .34 S e e J . M . N un ez, El ciceronianismo, p p . 1 0 3 – 2 3 .35 Se e J. M. Nun ez, El ciceronianismo, p p . 1 2 3 – 2 4 .36 S e e P . S h a r r a t t , “ R e c e n t W o r k o n P e t r u s R a m u s ( 1 9 7 0 – 1 9 8 6 ) , ” Rhetorica 5 ( 1 9 8 7 )

p p. 7 – 5 8 ( f o r “ R am i sm i n S p a in , ” s e e p p. 5 2 –5 3 ) ; C . C h a pa r r o G om e z , “ L a r et or i car a m is ta : p r in ci p io s y m et o d o s, ” a n d P. B a r be i to Dõa z , “ E l B r o c e n s e o P e d r o J u a n N u nez?S o b re l a i n tr o du cc io n e n E s pa na d e l a d i al ec t ic a r a m is t a, ” b o th i n J . M . M a e st re M a e st reetal. e ds , Humanismo y Pervivencia II.2, p p. 7 0 3–1 9 , 7 3 5 –4 6 ; L . M e rin o J er ez , “Numerus enla Rhetorica d e l B r oc en s e : e v ol u ci o n , f u en t es e i m pl ic a c io n e s, ” i n J . M . M a e st re M a e st r eet al. e ds , Humanismo y Pervivencia I.2, p p. 6 3 3 –4 2 , w he re t he d ep en de ce o f S anchezd e l as B ro za s’ th eo ry o f numerus o n O m er Ta l on ’ s Rhetorica ( 1 54 8 ) i s p r ov ed ; A . M a r tõn

Jimen e z , Reto rica y literatura en el siglo XVI ( Va l l a d o li d : U n i ve r s id a d d e Va l l a d o li d ,1 9 9 7) p p. 4 1 –4 3 . S e e a ls o G . O ld r in i, La disputa del metodo nel Rinascimento: indaginisu Ramo e sul ramismo ( F ir e nz e : L e L et t er e, 1 9 9 7 ), w h ere s o me a t t en ti o n ( p p. 1 2 9 –3 1

a n d 1 4 9–5 0 ) is p a id t o S . F ox M o rc ill o’ s R a mi sm , a l t ho u gh n ot t o h is w or k o n r he to ri c.37 O n t hi s a ut h or, a pa r t f ro m t he p a ge s d ev ot ed to h im b y R ico Ve rd u ( p p. 1 2 0 –

2 3) a nd M ar tõ ( p p. 4 2 –6 1 ), s ee t he m or e r ec en t D . P ue rt a , “ F ad r iq ue F ur io C er io l:aproximacion a s u obra reto r ic a ,” in J . M . M a es tr e M a es tre et al. e d. , Humanismo yPervivencia . . . I.2, p p. 8 5 1–5 6; D. W. B le zn ic k, “L as Institutiones rhetoricae d e Fur ioCeriol,” Nueva Revista de Filolog´ õa Hispa nica 1 3 ( 19 5 9) p p. 3 3 4–3 9; M . A . C or on el R am os ,“Eruditio non est pietas: it in er a ri o d e u na id ea d e F a d riq u e F u r io C er io l, ” in J . M . M a es tr e

Maestre et al. e ds . , Humanismo y Pervivencia II.3, p p. 1 47 9 –8 6 . A cc ord in g to M . A .Garrido et al. , “ R e to r i c as e s p a no l a s . . . , ” p p . 3 3 9 – 4 0 , t h e c o m pl e t e w o r k s o f F u r i o a r e








ied at Pa ri s, a ppli ed ma ny R ami st po stu la tes to hi s t ea ching i nSp ai n. R am us ’s k no wn l imi ta ti on o f rhe to ri c to elocutio and actiowa s a ls o a ss um ed by t he m ost in uent ial S pa nish a ut hor : Fra n-c is co Sa nc hez d e la s Broz as, w ho in his Organum dialecticum et

rhetoricum ( 1 57 9) a dv oc a te d a c le ar s ep ar a ti on b et wee n l og ic a ndrhetoric. 38 San ch ez , t ho ug h, c on ce al ed t he i n ue nc e of R a mu s i n ap os t -t r id en t in e S pa i n w h ere a n y n ea r ne s s t o re fo r m is t a u th o rs w a sa h az a rd ou s m a tt er. T h e s t iff ne s s o f S pa ni s h e du c at i on a l i n st i tu -tio ns c an be ex empl i ed w ith thi s wo rk: t he Organum dialecticumet rhetoricum, publi shed i n 1 579 , w as s ti ll t he o fcia l t ex tbo ok i nSa l a m an c a i n 1 7 7 1 , a l m os t t w o c e nt ur i es l a te r. P a r ad o x ic a ll y, a s D o nA b bo t t e x pl a i n s ,39 t he v er y p os s ibi l it y o f s o me S pa n is h e ig ht ee nt h -c en tu ry c ul tu ra l el em en ts i s o w ed to t hi s s ur vi va l of R en ai ss a nc erh et o ri c, w hi ch h ad s ome p oi nt s i n c om m on w it h t he n ew s pi ri t o f enlightenment.

I f t he re i s a n i nt el le ct ua l d i sc i pli n e re la t ed t o rh et or ic i n M o d-ern E uro pe, i t i s po etic s. Fo r t he c as e o f Spa in , w e a re fo rt una tet o h av e a t ho ro ug h s tu dy a va il ab le o n th e f orm at io n o f p oet ic t he-o r y, w h ic h a l s o i n cl u d es t w o c ha p t er s d ev o te d t o s ix t ee nt h -c en t ur y

rhetoric.40

In them , A . G arc´õ

a B errio read s s ever al o f the m ost im -p or ta n t t re at is e s l o ok in g f or e ch oe s o f H or ac e’s Ars poetica. A s h i sd e ta i l e d e x po s i t i o n p r og r es s e s ,41 t he c on cl us i on b ec o me s m or e a n dmo re ev id ent : the pres enc e a nd in uence o f H or ac e, a nd o f po -e ti c t he or y, i n rh et o ri c al t re a ti se s a m ou nt s t o p ra ct i ca l ly n o th in g,w it h o nl y th e tw o rel at iv e ex ce pti on s o f F ra nc is co S anc hez d e las

being edited in Valencia by a research group coordinated by J. Perez Dura and H.Mec h ou l an , a n d i ts r st v o lu m e h a s a l re a d y a p p ea r ed : F. F u r io Ceriol, Opera omnia,I ( Va l e n ci a : A l f o ns E l M a g n an i m , 1 9 9 6 ) .

38 O n w h i c h s e e A . M a r tõn J i m e nez, Reto rica y literatura, p p . 1 1 7 – 4 6 .39 D . P. A b b o t , “ L a R e t or i c a, ” p . 1 0 4 .40 A . G a r cõa B e r r i o , Formacio n de la teor´ õa literaria moderna (2). Teor´ õa poe tica del Siglo

de Oro ( Mu rci a : U ni ve rs id a d d e M u rc ia , 1 9 8 0 ) v o l. I I , p p. 1 5 –1 0 2 . T h e re i s a m uc hs h or t er r e ce n t p a no r a m a i n D . d e C o u rc e ll es , “ De s Artes poe ticas d a n s l ’ E s p a g n e d uX V Ie s i ec le : l a b el le echappe e de l a pa ro le po etique,” NouvelleRevue du SeiziemeSiecle 18

( 2 0 00 ) p p . 1 3 1 – 5 5, w h er e s o m e a t t en t io n t o t h e i m po r t a nc e o f r h et o r ic a l c o nc e pt s s u chas varietas and copia i s p ai d a n d th e im p or ta n ce o f Ar is to tl e, C ic ero a n d Q ui nt ili a nf or s ev er al S pa n is h w or ks o n th e m a tt er is a l so s tre ss ed . O n t hi s p er sp ec ti ve , s eea ls o M . M ol in a S an c he z , “ Po et i ca s l a ti n a s e s pa no la s de lo s s ig lo s XV I y X VI I: u naaproximacion a s u e s t u d i o , ” i n E . S a n c he z S a l or et al. e ds , La recepcio n, cit. in n . 11 ,p p . 4 9 7 –5 0 6 ( e sp e ci a ll y p p . 5 0 5 –6 ) .

41 A . G a r cõa B e r r i o , Formacio n, p p. 1 5 –4 8 , re vi ews t he w or ks o f A . d e N eb r ij a , J . L .Vi ve s , M . d e S a l in a s , A . G a rcõa M a t a m o r o s , F . F u r i o C e r i o l , B . A r i a s M o n t a n o a n d S .F o x M o r c i l l o .








B ro z as a n d A n to ni o L l ul l.42 Ga r cõa B er r io e x pl ai n s, h ow ev er, t ha tt h e r e a s o n f o r t h i s a b s e n c e w a s n e i t h e r l a c k o f i n t e r e s t n o r o f a f n i -t ie s , b ut s o me “ do ct ri na l s ti ff ne ss ” t ha t rh et o ri c d ep lo y ed i n o rd erto a vo id be in g a bs orb ed by i ts r iv a l d is ci pl in e. 43 B u t t he i n ue nc e

a ls o p la ys i ts r ol e t he ot he r w a y r ou nd : th e s ys te m o f rh et o ri c w asa n u na v oi d ab le s o ur ce fo r t h e t he or i za ti o n o f p o et r y, s pe ci a ll y a selocutio i s c on cer ne d. Th ou gh i t f al ls s li ght ly o ff t he s co pe o f t hi sp a per, i t i s s y mp t om a ti c t h a t t he m os t r em a rk a bl e w or k o n p o et i cth eo r y wr it te n i n s ix te ent h-c en tu ry S pa in c an b e u se d a s a n i ll us -t ra t iv e e xa m pl e: F er na n do d e H er re ra ’s Anotaciones o n G a rc il a s ode l a Vega ’s po et ry sh ow a c lea r in uen ce o f c las si ca l rheto ri c,

both from the tra ditio nal tria d Arist otle, Cicero and Quint ilian44

a n d f ro m m o re re c en tl y r ed i s co v er ed a u th o r s l i k e A ph t ho n iu s45 orH e r m o g e n e s .46

T he r el ig io us p er s pe ct iv e h a s a l w ay s h a d r es er v at i on s a bo utrheto ri c. A tec hniq ue, s uc h a s rhet or ic, w hic h co uld d et ou r the

judgement and feelings of the audience depending on the skill

42 A . G a r c ´õa B e r r i o , Formacion, p p . 4 8 – 6 8 .43 A . G a rcõa B e rr io , Formacio n, p . 7 4 . O n t he p ro gr es si ve a pp ro a ch o f rh et or ic

t ow ar ds p oe tic s, w hi ch h ad it s f un da men t al re as on i n th e i nc re as in g r ol e o f th e

a es th e ti c f un cti on i n r he to ri ca l t h eo ry, s ee J . R od rõg u ez P e q ue no, “ De la Reto ricaa la P oet i ca e n lo s e st ud io s li te ra r io s e n l os S ig lo s d e O ro ,” Edad de Oro 1 9 ( 20 0 0 )p p . 2 5 7 – 6 4 .

44 A s s ho wn b y C . C ue va s, “Te o rõa d e l l en g ua j e p oet ic o e n la s Anotaciones deH e r r e r a , ” i n B . L op ez B u en o e d. , Las “Anotaciones” de Fernando de Herrera. Doce estu-dios ( S ev il la : U ni ver s id a d d e S ev il la , 1 9 9 7) p p. 1 5 7–7 2 ; a n d B . M o rro s, Las polemicasliterarias en la Espana del siglo XVI: a propo sito de Fernando de Herrera y Garcilaso de laVega ( B a rc e lo n a : Q u a de r n s C r em a, 1 9 9 8 ) p p . 1 0 8 –9 6 , w h o a l so u n de r lin e s t h e r ol e o f S c a l i g e r ’ s Poetices libri septem a s o c ca s io n a l i n te r me d ia r y b e tw e en H e r re r a a n d a n -c ie n t a u t h o r s; s e e a l s o J . E . E s t i ll e s F a r r e, “ L a t e r mi n o l ogõa r e t or i ca e n H e r re r a , L o p e yC e rv a n te s ,” i n J . M . M a es t re M a e st re etal. e ds , Humanismo y Pervivencia, I I. 2 , p p. 7 6 1–6 8 .

45 O n wh ic h s ee A . B le cu a , “ L a re tor i c a e n l as Anotaciones: s ob re Af to n io y H e rre r ac o n o t r a s c o n s i d e r a c i o n e s ” i n B . L o p e z B u e n o e d . , Las “Anotaciones”, p p . 1 7 3 – 8 2 ; a n dB . M o rr o s, Las pole micas literarias, p p. 6 8 –7 0. O n A ph th on iu s’ Progymnasmata andt h ei r i n u e n ce i n s i xt e en t h- c en t ur y S p a ni s h t r e a ti s es , s e e M . V. P er ez C u s to d io , “ L asõn c r i s i s d e Q u i n t i l i a n o y A f t o n i o e n e l X V I : a p r o p o s i t o d e l o s Progymnasmata, ” i n T .

Albaladejo et al. eds, Quintiliano, v ol . I II , pp . 1 4 5 7 –6 7 ; E . A rt az a , “ E l ars narrandi enlos Progymnasmata d e A nt on io L ul io ,” i n L . L op ez G rig er a - A . R ed on do e ds , Homenajea Eugenio Asensio ( M a dr id : G red o s, 1 9 8 8 ) p p. 4 1 –5 5 ; L . L op e z G r ig e r a, “ N o ta s s o b relos Progymnasmata en la E sp ana d el s ig lo X VI ,” in J . M . M ae st re M ae st re et al. e d. , Humanismo y Pervivencia I.2, p p. 5 8 5–9 0; M . V. P er ez C u s t o d i o , “ L a e xp re s i on d e l e t h o s

y e l p at ho s e n l as e to pe y as e sc ola r es d e l R en a ci mi en to ,” in J . M . M a es tre M a es tre etal. e d . , Humanismo y Pervivencia II.2, p p . 7 9 5 – 8 0 6 .

46 S ee A. L . Lu jan A tie n za , “ L as Anotaciones d e H er re ra y l a s f o rm a s e s t il õsticasd e l a t r a d i c i o n h e r m o g e n e a n a , ” Hispanic Review 6 8 ( 2 00 0 ) p p. 3 5 9 –8 0 .








of t he o ra tor c oul d no t be t ru st ed by th os e w or ri ed a bou t t ruthor m ora ls . There i s no need t o reca ll here Pla to ’s co ndem na tio nof rheto ri c in his Gorgias or t he s ecu la r d eb ate o n i ts l eg it im ac y.A s f ar a s m od ern E uro pe i s c on cer ned , bo th t he C at ho li c c hu rch

a n d t h e r e f o r m e d o n e s s h o w a m b i v a l e n t a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s r h e t o r i c .On t he o ne han d, ch urc hes , l ike Pla to , a lso tend t o exc lude am er el y t e ch ni c a l r he to r i c fr o m o r th o do x m o r a li ty. T he w e ll - kn o wndis pute bet ween Lut her a nd Er asm us w as ba sed t o a grea t ex-tent , a s M. O ’R ourke ha s sh ow n,47 on L uther ’s a tta ck s o n E ra s-m us a s a n o ra to r. T hi s d oes n ot i mp ly, by a ny m ea ns , t ha t L ut he r-a ns t ur ne d t he ir b ack on rh et or ic : t he gu re s o f M el an ch th on48 orSt urm a cco unt w ell enou gh f or t he int eres t of t he R ef or ma ti oni n i t .49

M uc h t he s am e f ra m ew o rk o f m ix ed a t ti tu de s c an b e f ou nd i nt he v er y C a t ho l i c s i x te en th -c e nt ur y S pa i n.50 Ti m e a n d a g ai n t he v oi ce sa g a i n s t p a g a n i s m — a n d a g a i n s t p a g a n l i t e r a t u r e — c a n b e h e a r d , b u to n t h e o t h e r h a n d t h e r e i s a l s o a v i g o r o u s t r e n d i n f a v o u r o f s a c r e drh et o ri c h a nd b oo ks , w ho s e p a ce o f p ub li ca t io n i nc rea s ed a ft er t heC ou nc il o f Tre nt . F or t he m os t p ar t, th es e a ut ho rs d ra w t he ir e x-

a m pl es f ro m t he B i bl e, n ot f ro m c l as s i ca l l i t er a tu re ; t h e y p ay a l es s e ra t t e n t i o n t o elocutio a nd t hey gi ve a plac e i n t hei r w orks to actio, w hi chw a s o f c ou rs e n eg le ct ed b y t he s o -c a ll ed “ li te ra r y” rh et o ri c . T he re a re ,o f c o u r s e, e x ce pt i on s w h ic h m a na g e t o b r i ng t o g et he r c la s s ic a l l ea r n -i n g , C h r i s t i a n p i e t y a n d a g o o d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f r h e t o r i c . T h e m o s t

47 M . O ’ Ro ur k e B oy le , Rhetoric and Reform. Erasmus’ Civil Dispute with Luther

( C a mb r id g e M A : H a r va r d U n i v er s it y P re s s , 1 9 8 3 ) .48 O n M e la n ch t h on ’ s rh e to r ic , s e e t h e r ec e nt J . K na p e , PhilippMelanchtons’Rhetorik’

(Tu bingen: Max Niemeyer, 1993 ) and O. Bergwald, Philipp Melanchthons Sicht derRhetorik ( Wi es b ad en : H a rr a ss ow it z , 1 9 9 4) ; o n t he g e ne ra l i n ue n ce o f rh e to ric i nM e la n ch t h on ’s t h ou g h t, s e e M . B . A u ne , To Move the Heart: Philip Melanchthon’s Rhetor-ical View of Rite and its Implications for Contemporary Ritual Theory ( S a n F r a n ci s co :C hr is ti an U ni ve rs it ie s P re ss , 1 9 9 4) a n d C . J . C la s se n, Die Bedeutung der Rhetorik fu r

Melanchthons Interpretation profaner und biblischer Texte (Got t in g e n: Va n d en h o ec k &R u pr ec h t, 1 9 9 8 ); s e e a l so V. A . K a h n, “ E ra s m us : P r u d en c e a n d F a i t h ,” i n h e r Rhetoric,

Prudence and Skepticism in the Renaissance ( It h a ca : C o r ne l l Un i ve r si t y P re s s, 1 9 8 5 )

p p. 8 9– 11 4 ; wo rt h r ea din g a s u su al a re t he f ew p ag es d evo te d b y J . C . M ar go li n i n“L’apogee d e l a r h e t o r i q u e h u m a n i s t e ( 1 5 0 0 – 1 5 3 6 ) , ” i n M . F u m a r o l i e d . , Histoire de larhe torique, c i t . i n n . 2 9 , p p . 2 0 3 – 9 .

49 T he re is a t ho ro ug h a nd re cen t t re at men t o n t he s ub ject in O . M il le t, “ LaRef o rm e p r ot es t a nt e e t l a r h et o ri q ue ( c ir ca 1 5 2 0 –1 5 5 0 ) , ” i n M . F u m ar o li e d . , Histoire

de la rhe torique, p p . 2 5 9 – 3 1 2 .50 S e e G . L o p e t e g u i S e m p e r e n a , “ P a t r õstica, reto r i c a y d i a l e c t ic a e n a l g u n a s A r te s

d e p r e di c a ci o n d el s ig lo X VI ,” in J . M . M a es tr e M ae st re et al. e d. , Humanismo y Per-vivencia, I I . 2 , p p. 7 7 9 –8 6 .








r em a rk a bl e a mo n g t he m i s, w i th ou t d o ub t, L u is d e G r an a da ’s Rhetor-ica ecclesiastica, w hich is mo re tha n o nc e ac kno wled ged a s t he t he

best treatis e on sa cred rhetoric of its time51 a n d w h i c h h a d a c c o r d i n ginuence. 52

T he h o st i le a t ti tu d e fr o m s o me e le men t s o f t he c hu rc h t o wa r dsa n yt hi ng p a ga n , a n ci en t l it er a tu re n ot o nl y i nc lu d ed b ut e ve n o c-c u p y i n g o n e o f t h e l e a d i n g p l a c e s , c a n b e p l a c e d i n a m o r e g e n e r a lco nt ext . As L . G il53 h as p oi nte d o u t, th e s t ud y o f L at in a nd G re ek w asr a th er m or e p re ca r io u s i n S pa i n t ha n i n o th er E u ro pe an c ou nt ri es ,a n d o wi ng t o s e ve r al h is to r ic a l, ec o no mi c al a n d s o ci a l f ac to r s, t h ep ro f es s io n a l h um a n is t f ou n d i t v er y d i f c ul t t o m a n ag e a r ea s o n ab lel iv i ng o n t h e t e ac hi ng o f L a ti n o r r he to r ic .54 T he p ict ure d ra wn b y G ile m p h a s i z e s t h e m o s t n e g a t i v e a s p e c t s o f t h e m a t t e r , b u t h a s p r o v e dr ig h t i n m o s t i n s ta n ce s . M a n y o f t he m o s t e nl i gh te ne d a n d “ E u r op e-d i re ct e d” Sp a ni s h r he to r ic a l t re at i s es m u st b e t h ere fo re c o n si d e re d a sex cep ti on s r is in g a bo ve a m o re d es o la te p an or am a , a nd l im it ed t o a ne l it e o f c o nc e rn ed i n te ll ec t ua l s : t he c o ns i de ra b le a m o un t o f a u th o rsa n d h a n d b o o k s d o e s n o t r e e c t t h e m e a g r e i n t e r e s t o f t h e e d u c a t e dc l a s s e s o n t h e m a t t e r .

T he g en er a l p i ct u re t ha t e me rg es f ro m t he n ew a t t en t io n p a i d t oS p an i s h s i x t e en t h- c e n t ur y r h et o r i c i s n e c es s a r i l y c o m p l ex , h o w e ve rr el a t i ve ly n a rr o w t h e l i mi t s o f rh et o r ic m a y b e. T hi s i s , o f c o ur s e, n o t

51 S e e M . F u m a r o l i , L’age, c it . i n n . 2 1 , p . 1 4 4 a nd J . R ic o Ve rd u, La retorica, c i t . i nn . 1 1, p. 1 7. F or w id e r ef ere nc e o n t hi s a ut ho r, s ee L . G o nz al e z , “ B i b li o g r a fõa d e ys o br e L u is d e G r a na d a , ” Anthropos (Documentos A) 4 ( 1 9 9 2 ) p p . 2 0 2 – 1 8 a n d t h e o t h e r

a rti cle s i n t he s am e is su e, wh ic h is w ho ll y d ev ot ed to L ui s d e G ra na da . T he m os tcomprehensive and recent study is M. Lo pez Munoz, Fray Luis de Granada y la retorica(Almer õa : U n iv er s id a d d e A lm e rõa , 2 00 0 ). S ee a ls o J. G on zal ez V az q u e z , “ I n ue n c ia d eQ u in t il i an o e n l a r e to r i ca d e f r a y L u is d e G r a na d a ” a n d J . H e r as S an c he z , “ L a Retorica

eclesia stica d e f ra y L u is d e G ra n a da y s us f ue nt es . A po rt a ci on es a la t eo rõa l i t e r a r i a , ” both in T. Albaladejo et al. eds, Quintiliano, v ol . I II , p p. 1 3 07 –1 4 a nd p p. 1 34 7–6 2r es p ec t iv e ly ; a n d J . G o n z al e z V az q u e z - M . L o p e z M u no z , “ P er v i v en c ia d e l a t e o rõaretor i ca c la s ica e n a lg u na s r eto r i ca s e c l es i as t i ca s e s p a no l a s d e l s i g l o X V I , ” i n E . S a nchezS a l o r et al. e d . , La recepcio n de las artes cla sicas, p p . 2 9 1 – 9 8 .

52 O n t his a u th or ’ s im m ed ia te i n ue nc e, s ee M . L op e z M u no z , “ P er v iv e nc i a d e

l a r e to r ic a d e f r ay L ui s d e G r an a d a, ” i n J . M . M a es tr e M a es tre et al. e d. , Humanismo y Pervivencia, I I . 2 , p p . 7 8 7 – 9 3 .

53 S ee L . G il F e rn andez, Panorama social, c i t. i n n . 1 4 , a n d a ls o a n e xc el le n t u pd a te ds um m ar y o f h is p rev io us w or k i n L . G i l F er n an d ez , “ El e st ud io d e l as le n gu a s c la sicase n e l s i g l o X V I , ” Torre de los Lujanes 2 6 ( 1 99 4 ) p p. 1 3 1–3 9 .

54 O n t h e c o n cr e te ca s e o f t h e U n i ve r s it y o f A l ca l a a n d t h e w a ge s r e c ei v ed b y it st ea ch er s o f r he to ri c, s ee t he r ec en t M . V. P er ez C u st od io , “ S ob re lo s in g res o s d e lo scatedrat ic os d e re to r ic a d e Al ca la e n l a s eg u nd a m it ad d el X VI ,” Calamus renascens1 ( 20 0 0 ) p p. 2 7 7 –9 8 .








s ay ing t oo mu ch —t he w or ld i n 1 60 0 w a s q ui te d iff ere nt f ro m t ha to f 1 5 0 0 a n d t h e r e i s n o n e e d t o m e n t i o n t h e s p r e a d o f p r i n t i n g , t h ei ni ti a l c o l on iz a t i on o f A m er i ca , t h e d i ff er en t re li g i ou s r ef o rm s . W h a tI m ea n i s th at a ny c ul tu ra l p he no m en on , i f t ake n f or t he w ho le o f

t he s i x te en t h c en t ur y, i s s o m et hi n g u n a vo id a b l y s u bj ec t t o m o re o rl es s d ee p c h a ng es . N ev e rt h el es s , s u ch c o m pl ex i ty w a s n o t g ra n t edt o S p a n i s h r h e t o r i c b y i t s r s t p a n o r a m i c s t u d i e s .

S o , w h a t d o w e k n o w n o w a b o u t S p a n i s h R e n a i s s a n c e r h e t o r i c ,t ha t w e d id n ot k no w t hi rty y ea rs a go ? F ir st o f a ll , t he re a re re as on abl yc om pl et e c a ta l og ue s o f t he a u th o rs a n d t he ir w or ks ,55 th ou gh i t i s v er yl i k e l y t h a t s o m e f e w n a m e s w i l l a p p e a r i n t h e c o m i n g y e a r s ; m o r e -o ve r, s ev er a l a m on g t h e m os t i m po r ta n t t ex t s h a v e b ee n t he o bj ec t o f s c h ol a r l y e d i t in g .56 S ec on d, w e h av e a ge ne ra l p an or am a of t he t ea ch -i ng c o nd it io ns o f L at in a nd t he re fo re o f r het or ic, w hi ch s ho ws h ig he rd i f c u l t i e s a n d t r o u b l e s i f c o m p a r e d w i t h o t h e r p a r t s o f E u r o p e l i k eI ta l y o r F ra n ce .57 T hi rd , w e h av e a h is to ry o f C ic er on ia ni sm i n S pa in ,58

w hi c h s h ow s i t s c on s id er ab le h ea lt h, t h us c or re ct i ng t he i d ea o f a nh om o ge ne ou s a nt i -C ic ero n ia n S pa i n. F ou rt h, w e h av e a t ho ro u gh a c-c o u n t o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f r h e t o r i c , a s a p r e c e p t i v e d i s c i p l i n e , w i t h

t he o t he r p re ce pt i ve d is c ip li n e o f t h e t i me , p oe ti cs , w h ic h p res e nt su s w i t h a v e r y l i m i t e d i n u e n c e o f p o e t i c s o n r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r y ; 59 weh a ve e v id en c e, n ev e rt h el es s , o f t he s ub s ta n t ia l p re se nc e o f rh e to r i-cal elocutio i n th e p oe ti cs o f t he ti me . F in al ly w e h av e th e d et a il edf e a t u r e s o f t h e t e a c h i n g o f r h e t o r i c a t t h r e e u n i v e r s i t i e s : S a l a m a n c a ,Alc a la a n d V ale n c ia.60

W ha t w e n e ed n ow, a bo ve a ll , i s t he c on ti n ua ti o n o f s t ud ie s s u cha s t he se , o n p re ci s e el ds w hi c h a r e s t il l t o b e e xp lo red . M ore o ve r,

w e n ee d a c om pr eh en s iv e a n d p ro ba bl y c ol le ct iv e s ch ol a rl y e ffo rtw hi ch c a n m a ke s en se o f a l l t hi s a nd d ra w t he g e ne ra l p i ct ur e a nd i tsm a in f ea t u re s , w i th o ut s im p li f yi ng o r d i s to r t in g. I t c a n be ex p ec t edt ha t m a ny o f t he s t ep s ta ke n i n s uch d ire ct io n a nd t he a lr ea dy s ta r te dp r o j e c t s w i l l b e f r u i t f u l .

55 A b o v e a l l i n R h e t o r i c a l S e m i n a r , “ D a t a f o r m a t , ” Dispositio 2 2 –2 3 ( 19 83 ) p p. 1 9–64.

56

S e e n o t e 1 2 a b o v e .57 L . G i l F e r n an d e z , Panorama social.58 J. M. Nu nez Gonzalez, El ciceronianismo en Espana, c i t . i n n . 3 1 .59 I n A . G a r c õa B e r r i o , Formacio n, c i t . i n n . 4 0 .60 M o s t l y i n s t i l l u n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n s , s e e n o t e 1 2 .

Teoría Retórica en el siglo xvii español. una revision critica. 2002.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Teoría Retórica en el siglo xvii español. una revision critica. 2002.pdf