Rodrigo Cacho Casal

GÓNGORA IN ARCADIA: SANNAZARO AND THE PASTORAL MODE OF THE SOLEDADES

he Soledades stands as one of the most revolutionary and innovative poems Tof the Spanish Golden Age. Góngora created a sophisticated verbal world in which he showed more interest in intellectual beauty and aesthetic pleasure than a moral or didactic message, subverting the classical balance between docere and delectare. Thus the Soledades is often considered an important precedent of modern poetry, and it has even been compared to the work of Mallarmé.1 But Góngora’s originality was not made out of nothing. He used his literary culture to imitate classical, Italian, and Spanish authors borrowing from their images, topics, and leitmotifs. The importance of is especially noteworthy in his work.2 In the poems written in Góngora’s youth he shows he is acquainted with this tradition, especially the Petrarchist lyric; but even in his most famous cultist works, the Polifemo and the Soledades, one can detect the infuence of Giovan Battista Marino, Tommaso Stigliani, or Luigi Tansillo. It is also common to include Iacopo Sannazaro among the list of Góngora’s sources; however this infuence has not been studied suffciently.3 My purpose here will be to analyze the relationship between the Soledades and the Arcadia by highlighting aspects of the generic hybridization and literary aestheticism typical of the pastoral. Góngora’s indebtedness to Italian authors is mentioned by seventeenth- century commentators (Romanos). Two of the frst readers of his Polifemo and Soledades, Pedro de Valencia and Fernández de Córdoba, abbot of Rute, reproached him for the excessive presence in his works of Latinisms and ex- pressions taken from Italian authors. The abbot tells Góngora that he makes too much “uso de palabras peregrinas, digo derivadas de latín y toscano” (Parecer 140). And Pedro de Valencia is even more critical: “usa de vocablos

1. Carreira (225–37). On the comparison between Góngora and Mallarmé, see Sánchez Robayna (57–74). 2. The Italian sources of Góngora’s poetry have been studied, among others, by Alonso (“Notas”), Arce (Tasso 87–91), Crawford, Fucilla (252–57), Jammes (La obra poética 307–11, 368–72), Micó (67–110), Poggi, Trambaioli, and Vilanova (Las fuentes, Erasmo 410–55). On the other hand, Thomas’s main goal is to demonstrate that there is no infuence of Marino or other marinisti on Góngora. 3. The relationship between the Arcadia and the Soledades has been pointed out, among others, by Ruiz Pérez, Walker, and especially Waley.

The Romanic Review Volume 98 Number 4 © The Trustees of Columbia University 436 Rodrigo Cacho Casal peregrinos Italianos i otros del todo Latinos [. . .]. En estos vicios digo que cae v. m. de propósito i haziéndose fuerça, por estrañarse i imitar a los Italianos” (Carta 76). Also his detractors used similar arguments to attack him. In his Rimas de Tomé de Burguillos (1634), Lope de Vega insinuates that Góngora in fact plagiarized Tommaso Stigliani and Gabriello Chiabrera:4

Cierto poeta de mayor esfera, cuyo dicipulado difculto, de los libros de Italia fama espera. Mas, porque no conozcan por insulto los hurtos de Estillani y del Chabrera, escribe en griego disfrazado en culto. (Burguillos 75, 9–14)

Apart from these possible infuences, the Soledades shows remarkable simi- larities with one of the most refned and elegant works of the Italian Renais- sance, namely, the Arcadia of Iacopo Sannazaro, the frst complete edition of which was published in 1504. This best seller of the Renaissance and age represents the frst and more relevant model of the pastoral novel that was to be imitated by several European writers. The author conceived of the Arcadia as a learned combination of different sources, in particular Petrarch’s Canzoniere and .5 Sannazaro, “cultíssimo i castigadíssimo poeta,” as Herrera called him (Anotaciones 693), used his rich classical background to generate a complex literary palimpsest full of intertextual references that are channelled by ornate language made up of Latinisms, accumulations of superlatives, and chains of epithets.6 This “verbal aestheticism” (Folena 105) has numerous things in common with the style and the structure of the Soledades. Although some of Góngora’s seventeenth-century commentators quoted the name of Sannazaro, the most eloquent statement of the relation between the Arcadia and Góngora is found in a satirical sonnet written by Quevedo attaching the cultist poems of his rival, “¿Qué captas, nocturnal, en tus canciones . . .?”:7

4. Although the imitation of Stigliani in some passages of the Polifemo is clear, the infuence of Chiabrera on Góngora was very slight, as Scorza and Alonso (“Los hur- tos”) have shown. 5. As argued by Saccone, Petrarch and Virgil are “i due auctores, le due guide, dietro cui programmaticamente, ma direi anche necessariamente, si pone lo scrittore dell’Arcadia” (54–55). On the structure of the Arcadia see Saccone and Corti (281–304). In her view, the Arcadia “si confgura come un mosaico, una summa in cui confuiscono la tra- dizione classica e quella quattrocentesca del genere bucolico” (289). 6. The language and style of the Arcadia have been studied at length by Folena. See also Corti (305–23). 7. Cacho Casal. García Rodríguez and Conde Parrado (114–16) choose rather to asso- ciate Quevedo’s parody with the alchemical concept of voarchadumia; nevertheless, one explanation does not entirely rule out the other. Góngora in Arcadia 437

Tu forasteridad es tan eximia, que te ha de detractar el que te rumia; pues ructas viscerable cacoquimia farmacopolorando como mumia, si estomacabundancia das tan nimia metamorfoseando el Arcadumia. (9–14)

Among other insults and accusations, Quevedo insinuates that his rival has plagiarized the Arcadia. The term Arcadumia may be an allusion to the title of Sannazaro’s work, Arca-dia, in combination with the word dumi (from Latin dumus, “bramble”) used by the Italian writer: “mentre serpenti in dumi / saranno, e pesci in fumi” (Ve, 61–62). The sixteenth-century editors of the Arcadia, Tommaso Porcacchi and Francesco Sansovino, explain in their notes that this word means “Spini” or “Luoghi spinosi.” Thus Quevedo is accusing Góngora of copying and ruining Sannazaro’s novel, of transforming its beauti- ful and harmonic language into a confused and incomprehensible mixture of obscure sentences. Leaving aside the satirical content of the sonnet, it seems that Quevedo was not completely wrong when he established this link be- tween the Arcadia and Góngora. The frst indebtedness of Góngora to the Arcadia can be found in his choice of the pastoral genre.8 The question of the generic adscription of the Soledades has been debated ever since the poem frst appeared: some have considered it a bucolic piece, others an epic.9 In the dedicatory lines Góngora declares that the Soledades is not an epic (“trompa”), but a composition made for the pastoral fute of the Muse Euterpe:10 “que, a tu piedad Euterpe agradecida / su canoro dará dulce instrumento, / cuando la Fama no su trompa, al viento” (35–37). But the plot also has epic elements, such as the pilgrim’s shipwreck

8. About the pastoral and its theory see Egido (“Sin poética”), Gómez, López Bueno (“La égloga”), López Estrada (424–78), Pérez-Abadín Barro, Poggioli (1– 41, 153–65), and Schnabel (1– 46). 9. Roses Lozano (Una poética 121– 41) has documented this generic discussion in the Golden Age. On the relationship between the Soledades and the pastoral, see Callejo, Collins (52–69), Jammes (La obra poética 251), Poggioli (182–93), Roses Lozano (“Hibridaciones”), and Ruiz Pérez (417–24). Beverley (59–69) and Walker study the mixture of bucolic and epic elements in the Soledades, while Bultman analyzes the controversial rewriting and disintegration of Renaissance epic in Góngora. 10. Euterpe was the fute-playing Muse: “Una de las nueve musas, a la qual atribuyen la invención de las fautas o de las matemáticas” (Covarrubias Tesoro 574); and, as Covarrubias explains, this instrument has always been associated with the pastoral context since it was created by Pan, the god of the woods: “Todos dan la invención deste instrumento a Pan, dios silvano. [. . .] El uso de las fautas, que por lo dicho parece averse inventado en los campos, se truxo al poblado” (Tesoro 599). Salcedo Coronel offers a similar explanation: “Euterpe, una de las Musas, fue inventora de las fautas, instrumento pastoril [. . .]. Por esto don Luis la introduce en este su poema” (Ed. Soledades 10). 438 Rodrigo Cacho Casal that echoes the Odyssey or the athletic contests to celebrate the wedding in the frst Soledad that can be linked to the funeral games in the Aeneid and the Iliad. On the other hand, it also has an obvious pastoral frame, since the protagonists are shepherds and fshermen portrayed in idyllic country life. Góngora’s friend Antonio de las Infantas must have taken into consideration this last aspect when he referred to the Soledades as an “égloga cuya natura- leça introduce varios personajes” (Carta 252). This was also the case of the anonymous author of the Carta de un amigo de D. Luis de Góngora en que da su parecer acerca de las Soledades when he explains that there are no great characters in this poem: “de lo qual infero no convenir a la Soledad nombre de heroica, por hauer sido el intento principal de vuesa merced describirnos la vida pastoral” (Carreira 242). He comes to the following conclusion: “Resta, pues, demos nombre a la Soledad, ya que la excluimos de la épica, y según a mi ver ninguno otro le quadra como el de bucólica, égloga o pastoral” (Carreira 243). Fernández de Córdoba frst used similar arguments when he wrote in his Parecer that the Soledades was “un Poema (quando no lyrico de materia humilde) bucólico en lo que descubre hasta agora” (138). Later he was to revise his opinion in the Examen del ‘Antídoto,’ underlining the presence of different styles and genres in the Soledades:

no es drammático, tampoco puede ser épico, ni la fábula o actión es de Heroe, o persona illustre, ni acomodado el verso; menos es romançe, por más que tenga dél mixto, porque demás de no aiudarle el verso, ni introduçe Príncipes por sujeto del Poema, ni Cortes, ni guerras, ni aventuras, como el Ariosto, el Tasso Padre y el Alemani; Bucólico no es aunque en él entren Pastores, ni Haliéu- tico, aunque pescadores; ni Cinegético aunque caçadores; porque ninguno destos es sujeto adequado y trata o a de tratar juntamente de otros; pero porque introduce a todos los referidos es necesario confesar que es Poëma que los admite y abraza a todos: quál sea este, es sin duda el Melico, o Lyrico. (Examen 424)

The abbot of Rute views the Soledades as a compendium of genres, a lyrical multigenre. This position has gained major acceptance, and modern scholars have presented Góngora’s poem as a new and open genre made out of the mixture of the traditional ones.11 But it should not be forgotten that such a combination of different styles and modes is also typical of the pastoral. The hybridization of epic, elegiac, and dramatic elements, of the high and the low, was an important characteristic of bucolic texts, and in his novel Sannazaro went even further in mixing prose and verse. It can be said that the pastoral

11. See, for example, Ly and Carreira (225–26). Juan de Jáuregui expressed a similar idea in his Antídoto, even if he used it to criticize Góngora: “haciendo una ensalada y mezcla tan disonante de estilos” (53). Góngora in Arcadia 439 is a sort of “plurigenre” (Schnabel 39) or a “genre of genres” (López Bueno “La égloga”). All these aspects are found in the Arcadia and, of course, in the Soledades. Even Garcilaso employed this combinatorial technique in his Églogas, especially in the second one where drama and epic play an impor- tant role (Komanecky), as showed by Fernando de Herrera: “Tiene mucha parte de principios medianos, de comedia, de tragedia, fábula, coro i elegía; también ai de todos estilos: frases llanas traídas del vulgo [. . .]; i alto más que conviene a bucólica” (Anotaciones 800). And Sannazaro was one of the most decisive models followed by Garcilaso, especially in the second Égloga where he translated virtually entire parts of the prose of the Arcadia, turning them into verse.12 Góngora seems to take into consideration all these sources while at the same time trying to compete with them. His point of departure in the Soledades is the pastoral mode whose most important author in the Spanish Golden Age was Garcilaso. Then, to create something completely new, Góngora went back to the origins, to the master of modern Spanish poetry. In his long silva he dialogues with his eminent predecessor and, more precisely, with his second eclogue that has long been considered a kind of failure, mostly because of its length and hybrid condition. To proceed with his competition, Góngora decided to go back to the principal model used by Garcilaso, Sannazaro, in a complex game of mirrors and cross-references. In the Arcadia he found a sophisticated verbal artefact, full of classical evocations housed in an open and mixed structure. As Garcilaso had done before, Góngora rewrote the prose of the Italian novel in verse, trying to continue and outdo the failed experiment of the second Égloga. In the bucolic genre Góngora found all the freedom he needed to create one of the highest expressions of the Baroque art, the Soledades: a revolutionary pastoral. The Arcadia and the Soledades have signifcant elements in common, start- ing with the narrative structures of both works. In Góngora’s poem there is little action; instead, it is built upon a series of pictorial descriptions of nature and the idyllic life of shepherds and fshermen that are linked together by the leading fgure of the protagonist, the pilgrim.13 This has been clearly described by the anonymous author of the Carta de un amigo de D. Luis: “por hauer sido el intento principal de vuesa merced describirnos la vida pastoral de suerte que el peregrino y su viage es un camino o medio que vuesa merced elige para alcançar el principal fn” (Carreira 242). Slow-motion description tends to predominate, and the slight narrative elements of the plot are given by the

12. The infuence of the Arcadia on Garcilaso has been studied by Lapesa (86–92). For the relation between Sannazaro’s novel and the second Égloga see Gargano. The fortune of the Arcadia in the Golden Age has been studied by López Estrada (145–51) and Reyes Cano. 13. On the plot of the Soledades, Joseph Pellicer underscored its poverty: “el asumpto más estéril, más escabroso” (Lecciones solemnes 352). On the fundamental role of the pilgrim in the poem, see Collins (70–85), Jammes (Ed. Soledades 47–50), and Hart. 440 Rodrigo Cacho Casal pilgrim’s wanderings: we walk with him and see through his eyes. We know little about this mysterious character, but it is enough to get a general idea of what has happened to him. He must be a nobleman, maybe a prince, who was shipwrecked while away from his country after been rejected by his beloved. Here Góngora is using the traditional fgure of the love pilgrim, developed in the European lyric since Petrarch (Vilanova Erasmo 410– 46). In the structure of the Arcadia we fnd precisely the same elements: the natural world of shepherds, the slow descriptive rhythm, and the unifying character of the protagonist who is, once more, a broken-hearted love pil- grim.14 The plot of the novel is very simple: Sincero (mask of Sannazaro), the protagonist and the narrator of the story, is living in exile in Arcadia, having found refuge in pastoral life after his beloved rejected him. Very little actu- ally happens while he is there: he walks with other shepherds through the woods, plays and listens to their songs in a clear development of the Virgilian “cantantes ut eamus” (Eclogues IX, 65). As Góngora’s pilgrim, he is living testimony of an ideal world and, again, we know very little about him until the sixth part of the Arcadia. Here we are told that he is living far from his country: “la allontananza de la cara patria” (V, 4), which reminds us of the condition of Góngora’s pilgrim: “desterrado” (I, 735), “mi destierro” (II, 160). Both authors use the technique of delaying information about the life of their protagonists in order to create intrigue and suspense. The reader has to reach the central part of the Arcadia in order to gain any information about the misadventures of Sincero, and it is only in the second Soledad that one begins to learn more about Góngora’s pilgrim. The description of Sincero given in the epilogue of the Arcadia (A la sam- pogna) is very close to that of Góngora’s character: “colui il quale ti compose di queste canne, quando in Arcadia venne, non come rustico pastore ma come coltissimo giovene, benché sconosciuto, e peregrino di amore, vi si condusse” (16). This brief passage could be the point of departure used to create the protagonist of the Soledades, who is constantly characterized as a young and refned pilgrim of love: “joven” (I, 34, 222, 233 . . .), “peregrino” (Dedication, 1; I, 19, 182 . . .), “cortesano” (I, 714). The autobiographical narration of Sin- cero is to be found in the seventh part of the novel, where he tells his sad story. He had to leave Naples and his beloved: “presi per partito di abandonare Na- poli e le paterne case, credendo forse di lasciare amore e i pensieri insieme con quelle” (VII, 16); but now he fnds himself alone and sadder than ever: “ora mi posso giustamente sovra ogni altro chiamare infelicissimo, trovandomi per tanta distanza di paese absente da lei” (VII, 17). Here we must remember the opening lines of the frst Soledad: “náufrago y desdeñado, sobre ausente,

14. These similarities between the Soledades and the Arcadia were noticed by Ruiz Pérez (417n59), Waley (193–98), and Walker (371). Lida de Malkiel (241–51) has also seen a possible indebtedness of the plot of the Soledades to the seventh discourse of the Greek orator Dio Chrysostom. Góngora in Arcadia 441

/ lagrimosas de amor dulces querellas / da al mar” (I, 9–11), which are also linked to the following passage of the Arcadia: “io per tanto spazio di cielo, per tanta longinquità di terra, per tanti seni di mare dal mio desío dilungato, in continuo dolore e lacrime mi consumo” (VII, 22).15 Góngora adopts as the backbone of his plot the mysterious and vague narra- tive structure of the Arcadia, while at the same time, following on Sannazaro’s novel, he creates a protagonist who is a model of elegance and nobility. These qualities constitute two of the basic pillars of which his poem is made. From its very beginning, the Soledades presents a game of mirrors where textual elements act as fgural referents of the work in itself. Here the elegance of the pilgrim is a refection of the aesthetic refnement of the poem: the character carries in his own nature the stylistic essence of Góngora’s work.16 The textual overlapping of form and content at different levels of the poem represents one of the most skillful techniques employed in the Soledades. This structural pattern can be detected in another signifcant passage in the Soledades that has been modelled by Góngora on the Arcadia. During the wedding celebrations there is an athletic contest between young shepherds who measure their strength and skill at wrestling, jumping, and running. The relation with the funeral games of the Iliad (book XXIII), the Aeneid (book V) and the Thebaid (book VI) is very clear, but Sannazaro, who frst adapted these competitions to a pastoral context, is the channel through which these antecedents have been fltered by Góngora. In the ninth part of his Arcadia we become spectators of the funeral games in memory of Massilia, where there is elaborate use of intertextuality, especially Homer and Virgil (La Marca). Fernández de Córdoba detected this chain of indebtednesses concerning the wrestling match in the Soledades: “esta lucha que describe no cede a la de Homero y Statio en sus juegos funerales, ni a la de Hércules y Anteo escrita por Lucano, ni a la de los Pastores por Sanazaro en su Arcadia” (Examen 435).17 Góngora followed Virgil, Homer, and Statius through Sannazaro while at the same time departing from them in numerous innovations. The most remark- able change in the narrative frame is that he transforms the funeral contest into a wedding party, presenting a more festive atmosphere. Góngora imitates Sannazaro in deciding to omit the more violent and bloody contests that can be found in the classical sources, such as boxing or fencing. But the Spanish

15. The old político serrano who guides the pilgrim in the Soledades (I, 516–24) seems related to the old shepherd Opico of the Arcadia, who also leads Sincero during part of his journey (V, 12). Both Opico and the serrano are presented as leading fgures of their community and both offer themselves as guides (“guida,” “cabo”) to a locus amoenus. 16. On the concept of the récit spéculaire see Dällenbach. 17. Salcedo Coronel also explains the indebtedness with Statius and Lucan (Ed. Sole- dades 185v-88v), while Pellicer points out the infuence of on Góngora: “Quiso D. L. en solemnidad de la boda festejalla con celebrar unos juegos olímpicos a imitación de Píndaro” (Lecciones solemnes 512). 442 Rodrigo Cacho Casal poet goes even further since he prefers not to reproduce the wolf hunting of the Arcadia: he goes another step towards the transformation of these events into an artistic and entertaining spectacle far removed from any form of violence. Even the wrestling is partially deprived of its roughness. In the frst Soledad (958–1076) three contests can be found: wrestling, jumping, and running. The frst and the last have clear antecedents in the Ar- cadia and its classical models, while the second seems to be an amplifcation of two brief passages of Sannazaro’s novel where he mentions the typical games performed by shepherds: “addestrarse nei lievi salti” (I, 7), “ora provandone a saltare” (V, 7). The wrestling contest is based on an imitation of Statius and Sannazaro (who closely follows Homer in this episode):

Los árboles que el bosque habian fngido, umbroso coliseo ya formando, despejan el ejido, olímpica palestra de valientes desnudos labradores. Llegó la desposada apenas, cuando feroz ardiente muestra hicieron dos robustos luchadores de sus músculos, menos defendidos del blanco lino que del vello obscuro. Abrazáronse pues los dos, y luego, humo anhelando el que no suda fuego, de recíprocos nudos impedidos, cual duros olmos de implicantes vides, yedra el uno es tenaz del otro, muro: mañosos, al fn, hijos de la tierra, cuando fuertes no Alcides, procuran derribarse, y, derribados, cual pinos se levantan arraigados en los profundos senos de la sierra. Premio los honra igual, y de otros cuatro ciñe las sienes glorïosa rama, con que se puso término a la lucha. (Soledades I, 958–80)

Sannazaro also describes the fght between two semi-naked shepherds who show off their muscles (“spogliatosi il manto, cominciò a mostrare le late spalle”), focusing on their strength: “furiosamente si ristrinsero con le forti braccia” (XI, 40). But Góngora has also taken into consideration the wrestling scene in the Thebaid, combining its imitation with the Arcadia, as shown in the description in both works of the sweating contenders: “per ogni membro ad ambiduo correva il sudore” (XI, 41), “fatibus alternis aegroque effectus hiatu / exuit ingestas fuvio sudoris harenas” (VI, 873–74). The line by Gón- gora, “humo anhelando el que no suda fuego,” seems to compress the pas- Góngora in Arcadia 443 sage of the Thebaid, emphasizing the intensity of the fght through igneous images. Góngora displays more indebtedness with Statius. For example, in the Thebaid one fnds the image of the knots: “de recíprocos nudos impedidos,” “evadere nodos” (VI, 890); and an extended simile of the struggle by the two contenders when they fall and rise again with the oscillation of a cypress tree moved by the wind. The two lines of the Soledades, “cual pinos se levantan arraigados / en los profundos senos de la sierra,” are a synthesis and rewriting of Statius:

ille autem, Alpini veluti regina cupressus verticis urgentes cervicem inclinat ad Austros vix sese radice tenens, terraeque propinquat, iamdudum aetherias eadem reditura sub auras. (Thebaid VI, 854–57)

This tendency by Góngora to use lines of the Thebaid, while at the same time compressing them, can be seen in another passage of the wrestling scene. When Góngora refers to the shepherds as “mañosos, al fn, hijos de la tierra, / cuando fuertes no Alcides,” he is remembering the fght between Hercules and the giant Antaeus, son of Earth, described in Lucan’s Pharsalia (IV, 593–660). But more than a direct imitation of Lucan, Góngora seems to be once again following Statius, who also refers to this episode:

Herculeis pressum sic fama lacertis terrigenam sudasse Libyn, cum fraude reperta raptus in excelsum, nec iam spes ulla cadendi, nec licet extrema matrem contingere planta. (Thebaid VI, 893–96)

The contest presented in the Soledades fnishes with a draw, and both shep- herds receive a prize. In this case, the Spanish author is once again imitat- ing Sannazaro (in his translation of Iliad XXIII, 735–37): “Premio los honra igual,” “Eguale è di ambiduo la vittoria, et eguali doni prenderete” (XI, 44). But Góngora’s literary technique is not limited to imitation and rewriting, since new elements have been added to the representation of the wrestling game. Most interesting is the use of images such as the elm tree and the vine, and the ivy and the wall, compared to the two contenders linked together in combat while they struggle to defeat each other: “cual duros olmos de impli- cantes vides, / yedra el uno es tenaz del otro, muro.” This image implies the subversion of these two topical comparisons, generally employed in classical literature to refer to the marital or sexual union of two lovers (Smith 91). Góngora demonstrates once more his elaborate hybridization of models and traditions. The next competition in the Soledades is a race based on an equally complex compilation of sources. The description of a similar event takes place in the Iliad (XXIII, 740–97), the Aeneid (V, 286–361), the Thebaid (VI, 550–645), 444 Rodrigo Cacho Casal and the Arcadia (XI, 18–26). The two closest models used by Góngora are once again Statius and Sannazaro. Both include the image of arrows and a deer reproduced in the Spanish poem:

salen cual de torcidos arcos, o nervïosos o acerados, con silbo igual, dos veces diez saetas. No el polvo desparece el campo, que no pisan alas hierba; es el más torpe una herida cierva. (Soledades I, 1038– 43)

Parthorumque fuga totidem exsiluisse sagittas. non aliter, celeres Hyrcana per avia cervi cum procul impasti fremitum accepere leonis, sive putant, rapit attonitos fuga caeca metusque congregat, et longum dant cornua mixta fragorem. (Thebaid VI, 597–601)

gioveni leggerissimi e usati di giungere i cervi per le selve [. . .]. E ciascuno postosi al dovuto ordine, non fu sí tosto dato il segno che a un tempo tutti cominciarono a stendere i passi per la verde campagna, con tanto impeto che veramente saette o folgori avresti detto che stati fusseno. (Arcadia XI, 19–20)

Góngora uses these sources as a starting point, but he adds new elements to his description of the foot race. He has introduced images and similes usu- ally linked to love poetry. Statius and Sannazaro refer only to deer, but they do not specify if the animals are wounded as Góngora does: “herida cierva.” The wounded stag is a frequent image in lyrical texts used to refer to the broken-hearted lover (Lida de Malkiel 52–79). But even more remarkable is the similarity established between the three running shepherds embracing the elms (used as fnishing line) and the myth of Daphne and Apollo. The young men embrace the elms just as Apollo embraced his beloved nymph after she was turned into a laurel tree:

De la Peneida virgen desdeñosa los dulces fugitivos miembros bellos en la corteza no abrazó reciente más frme Apolo, más estrechamente, que de una y de otra meta glorïosa las duras basas abrazaron ellos con triplicado nudo. (Soledades I, 1054–60)

Clearly, the poet is intertextualizing Garcilaso’s famous Sonnet XIII, “A Dafne ya los brazos le crecían.” Góngora’s “dulces fugitivos miembros bellos” is Góngora in Arcadia 445 an amplifcation of Garcilaso’s syntagm: “tiernos miembros” (XIII, 6). Once more, the author of the Soledades presents a refned intertextual elaboration by challenging his prestigious Spanish model. At the same time, he intermin- gles a series of morbid images in the episode of the wedding games, thereby depriving it of some of its epic intensity.18 Also the elm and the vine, as well as the ivy and the wall that appear in the wrestling contest, are linked to this sensual atmosphere created by Góngora. There is a clear insistence on the act of embracing (“Abrazáronse pues los dos,” “de recíprocos nudos impedidos,” “implicantes vides,” “abrazó,” “abrazaron”) that works as an anticipation of the sexual union of the married couple that will follow the celebratory games. At last, the “brazos” of the “galán novio” (I, 1068–69) can reach the bride, satisfying their sexual appetite (“deseo”). The contests are presented as a preparation for the physical fusion of the two lovers, and also as a way of delaying it, creating a sensual atmosphere of suspense that intoxicates the language of the Soledades. It is not a coincidence that the fnal union of the marriage is compared to a battle: clearly it stands in contrast to the earlier struggle between the athletes which was described in erotic images. These op- positions produce what we might call a metaphorical chiasmus:

los novios entra en dura no estacada: que, siendo Amor una deidad alada, bien previno la hija de la espuma a batallas de amor campo de pluma. (Soledades I, 1088–91)

The frst Soledad closes with this sensual crescendo showing several links with the style of the Arcadia. Góngora followed its aesthetic reelaboration of epic models, toning down the most violent and rough references in the games episode. Sannazaro adapted the athletic contests described by Homer, Virgil, and Statius, thereby emphasizing its spectacular and ludic realization. The physical confrontation then becomes an effective way to introduce pictorial descriptions and sumptuous style. Góngora goes even further in this process of ornamental recreation, pushing his poem towards a poetics of excess saturated with morbid sensuality. This chain of love and sexual metaphors can also be seen as an extended allegory of Góngora’s literary technique, for his creation is based on the imita- tion and the fusion of different sources. Statius has been mixed promiscuously with Sannazaro, while both have been invaded by Góngora’s unstoppable food of stylistic sumptuousness. Previous texts and literary models come to- gether in a sensual embrace that is a refection of images such as the union of the two wrestlers, the elm and the vine, or the ivy and the wall. As already pointed out, Góngora uses characters, metaphors, and images to mirror his

18. For a reading of these episodes as a representation of humanistic homoeroticism, see De Armas. 446 Rodrigo Cacho Casal own poetic creation. The imitative technique of the Soledades is represented through a series of metaphors: narrative elements refect the poem’s construc- tion as a work of art. In the wedding contests episode, for example, Góngora introduces a complex allegory of writing where the content of the poem be- comes its own form and vice versa.19 The mirroring structure of the Soledades continues in the second part of the poem. This section is again linked to pastoral literature and Sannazaro, more precisely, with piscatorial poetry initiated by Sannazaro in his Eclogae pisca- toriae. This generic starting point is enriched by its combination with other sources such as didactic poetry on fshing and falconry.20 In fact, the motive of hunting is as frequent in the second Soledad as the embracing was in the frst part. Instead of bodies and forces that are attracted to each other, in the Soledad II we can fnd the violent chasing of repelling entities. For example, the fsherman’s daughters hunt seals without any feminine compassion (II, 418–511), just as birds of prey seek their victims in the sky. The two parts of the poem function here as inverted mirrors. In the Soledad I violent references are omitted, while in the second part they are emphasized. This structural in- version is even more evident when we compare the way in which the wrestlers of the frst part and the fsherwomen of the second are portrayed. The two naked men are described through the ambiguous homoerotic fusion of their bodies, while the women play a masculine role in their frenetic hunt for seals, whose description stresses the bloodiest details. The open genre of the pastoral gave Góngora the possibility to expand and fuse different sources and codes used to allegorize his own imitative procedures. The barriers between epic and lyric, beauty and death, male and female are cancelled in a provocative rhetorical embrace. All these extended allegories tend to emphasize the fun- damental role played by style in Góngora’s work: language becomes content, matter becomes essence. The Soledades displays a refned veil of verbal sumptuousness in which Nature is represented as a work of art. The poem is mostly descriptive, and the natural world is its true protagonist. Of course, this portrayal of Nature is purely artifcial and pictorial: Góngora created a poetic tapestry through a complex combination of stylistic and linguistic devices.21 The product is typical of pastoral literature (Rivers “Nature,” “The Pastoral”), especially Sannazaro’s Arcadia, a work conceived as a dense accumulation of learned intertexts form classical literature. Góngora rewrote its refned and artifcial

19. I am thinking here of Paul de Man’s study of metafgural techniques, Allegories of Reading. 20. See Callejo. For example, the “piscatorio cántico” (II, 621) by Lícidas and Micón is clearly inspired on Sannazaro’s frst piscatorial eclogue: an amoebaean song between Lycidas and Mycon. Góngora’s indebtedness to the Italian piscatorial and didactic poetry of the Renaissance deserves to be studied with more detail. 21. On Nature and its pictorial elaboration in the Soledades see Beverley (70–79), Blanco, Collins (85–100, 112–35), Edwards, Gornall, and Woods. Góngora in Arcadia 447 verbal world, introducing numerous Latinisms and epithets with classical an- tecedents which had also been used by Sannazaro. As in other aspects of his imitation, very often Góngora dialogues with Latin poets using the Arcadia as an intermediary. This is very clear in his use of Latinisms. The Soledades was strongly criticized on account of the accumulation of words and syntax taken from the Latin language, but this was also the case for Sannazaro. Francesco Sansovino, in his edition of the Arcadia, mentions this abuse of Latinisms: “l’elocutioni latine lo hanno reso diffcile e affettato alquanto” (A6). In some polemic texts of the seventeenth century about the Soledades one fnds com- parisons between the style of the Arcadia and Góngora. For example, in the epistle to the Conde de Villamediana defending cultismo that Manuel Ponce wrote between 1617 and 1622, he stated: “¡Qué religión nos obliga a no exceder escriuiendo los términos de nuestra ydioma, si todos los autores se salieron del suyo, o por adquerir nuebo ornato, o por necesidad de esplicar con estrangeras boçes sus conceptos con más decencia! [. . .] ¡Qué latinismos i nouedades no escriuió Sanaçaro!” (Rozas and Quilis 421). The link between the Arcadia and the Soledades is made even clearer in the Discursos apologé- ticos by Pedro Díaz de Rivas. He sees the Latinisms used by Sannazaro as a valid way to justify their massive presence in Góngora’s poem: “Más licencio- sos fueron algunos Italianos en aprovecharse de la lengua latina; y entre ellos el Sannazaro, como consta de un Índice al fn de su Arcadia, que contiene más de cien vozes latinas” (44). A close reading of both texts reveals a remarkable similarity in the use of Latinisms and epithets. Many of those that appear in the Soledades derive directly from Latin or Italian authors, but the Arcadia has also been an impor- tant source for Góngora, and not only for him, since some of its Latinisms can be found in other Spanish authors of the Golden Age (Arce “ Sannazaro”). Var- ious Latinisms and epithets included in the Soledades are also in Sannazaro, such as: abortar, ambiguo, anhelante, cerúleo, cóncavo, palestra, pulular, or semicapro. I list the most signifcant cases in an Appendix. These linguistic devices are presented in the Soledades through a fexible metrical form: the silva.22 Though the genre has an obvious indebtedness to the classical Silvae by Statius and his humanist imitators such as Poliziano, it is also clear that the metrical structure of the silva—the free combination of unfxed lines of eleven and seven syllables—has an Italian origin. Dur- ing the Renaissance, the madrigale was a composition defned by its brevity and its free use of hendecasyllables and heptasyllables. Thus the silva can be considered almost as an expanded madrigal. As described by Pietro Bembo in his Prose della volgar lingua (1525), the madrigal was generally conceived as a genre linked to bucolic themes, witness derivation from the mandria, “fock”:

22. On the silva see Egido (“La silva”), Rivers (“La problemática”), Vossler (97–101), and the studies edited by López Bueno (Ed. La silva). 448 Rodrigo Cacho Casal

Libere poi sono quell’altre, che non hanno alcuna legge o nel numero de’ versi o nella maniera di rimargli, ma ciascuno, sì come ad esso piace, così le forma; e queste universalmente sono tutte madriali chiamate, o per ciò che da prima cose materiali e grosse si cantassero in quella maniera di rime, sciolta e materiale altresì; o pure perché così, più che in altro modo, pastorali amori e altri loro boscarecci avenimenti ragionassero quelle genti, nella guisa che i Latini e Greci ragionano nelle egloghe loro, il nome delle canzoni formando e pigliando dalle mandre. (Prose 136)

It is certainly not a coincidence that the metrical form chosen by for his pastoral drama Aminta (1581), published with the subtitle favola boschereccia, was for the most part a free combination of hendecasyllables and heptasyllables. The result is an extended madrigal closely tied to the re- fned bucolic tradition that developed after Sannazaro’s Arcadia. This link was continued by several imitators of the Aminta who composed favole boscher- eccie and reached one of its peaks in 1589 with the publication of Il pastor fdo by Battista Guarini, who followed Tasso and the metrical structure of his Aminta.23 Tassos’s work must have had a strong impact on Spanish poetry, as it was translated in 1607 by Juan de Jáuregui (Arce Tasso 127–304). Jáuregui respected the metrical form of the original and in the dedication he tried to justify this decision. The absence of a fxed rhyme scheme and the unregulated combination of lines of different length in the same work (and such a long one) was a novelty that he felt he had to explain to his Spanish readers:

Bien creo que algunos se agradarán poco de los versos libres y desiguales que tanto usan los italianos; y sé que hay orejas que si no sienten a ciertas distancias el porrazo del consonante, pierden la paciencia y queda el lector con desabrido paladar, como si en aquello consistiese toda la sustancia de la poesía. (Aminta tradu- cido 36)

The tradition started by the Aminta is possibly the basis of one of the frst documented silvas of Baroque Spanish poetry (note that the frst word men- tioned in the poem is, signifcantly, selvas): “Selvas, donde en tapetes de es- meralda” by Pedro Espinosa, written before September 1603 and published in the anthology Primera parte de las Flores de poetas ilustres de España (1605). The frame is bucolic, the style ornamental. The relation of this composition with its Italian pastoral models is made more explicit by Espinosa when he calls his poem “pastoriles boscarechas” (Flores 129v), introducing an Italian- ism reminiscent of the subtitle of the Aminta and other works which followed

23. Chiodo “Tra l’Aminta.” On the evolution of these metrical forms see Beltrami; on the madrigal see Martini. Góngora in Arcadia 449 it. The affliation with these models can also be found in Góngora, who was dialoguing actively with the Italian pastoral tradition in his Soledades.24 He situated himself in this prestigious lineage of elegant bucolic literature that starts with Sannazaro and continues with Tasso and Guarini.25 The metrical form that Góngora chose for his long descriptive poem is another element of his complex imitation. Both Tasso and Guarini provided Góngora with the most suitable verse to perform the arcadic model codifed by Sannazaro. At the same time, the development of the silva in Spain parallels the raise of the idillio in . In the frst decades of the seventeenth century, the descrip- tive poetry of mythological and pastoral themes, usually written in unrhymed heptasyllables and hendecasyllables, gained importance. In Italy these poems were called idilli, a genre that had a role in Baroque lyric poetry and was used by authors such as Marino who in 1620 published his famous collection of idylls entitled La Sampogna (Chiodo L’idillio). The frst printed texts of this genre appeared around 1607, and very soon became a popular literary vogue. In these poems appears a concentration of sentimental motives with elaborate baroque stylistic devices. This aim to refned artifciality and wonder is one of the basic components of Baroque poetics; and is also present in several Spanish silvas. From this perspective, the Soledades is no longer alone in the European poetical context of the seventeenth century. It derives from the pas- toral aestheticism of Sannazaro and his imitators (Tasso and Guarini) and is linked to the new evolution of Baroque poetry that, in both of Italy and Spain, used a fexible metrical form of heptasyllables and hendecasyllables to express its poetics of wonderment. Thus the Soledades should not be considered a monstrous novelty, but rather one of the most original products of literary evolution from the Renaissance to the Baroque. As a poet, Góngora always had in mind the Italian tradition, whether the Petrarchism or the pastoral. The Soledades shows a persistent accumulation of classical echoes, but these sources have been imitated through Italian pastoral. These models provided Góngora with a fertile mode open to experimentation and formal sophistication. The Italian pastoral tends to privilege the verbal elaboration of literature more than its moral implications. Between docere and delectare it clearly prefers the second as stated by Guarini in his Verrato

24. On the relation between the Aminta and the Soledades see Egido (“La silva” 24–25), Molho (46– 47) and Ruiz Pérez (413–15). 25. Góngora directly imitated the Aminta in his early work the Comedia venatoria (1582-1586?). The Comedia is written in tercets, octaves, and redondillas. Its indebt- edness to the Aminta has been studied by Arce (Tasso 315–18) and Jammes (La obra poética 368–72). There are other similarities between the Aminta, the Pastor fdo, and the Soledades: for example, the theatricality and the presence of choruses that break up the action. The parallelism between the chorus in the Soledad I (767–844) and the one in the Pastor fdo (V, 1460–578) is especially remarkable. Both are epithalamiums clearly related to Catullus (Ponce Cárdenas): “Ven, Himeneo, ven donde te espera,” “Vieni, santo Imeneo.” 450 Rodrigo Cacho Casal

(1588), where he defends himself against the accusation of having written a hybrid work such as the Pastor fdo that lacks a didactic message. For him, the fnal purpose of poetry is to entertain: “la poetica, la qual non ha per fn l’insegnare, ma il dilettare, e dilettando giovare” (747). In the Soledades Gón- gora coincides with these precepts, and in fact he also had to answer similar accusations. In a letter written in response to his detractors, he stated that the goal of literature is to exercise the intellect of the reader: “tiene vtilidad auiuar el ingenio” (Carreira 256). The Baroque age had to face the classical confict between docere and delec- tare, and solved it by fusing both concepts while privileging the latter (Mor- purgo-Tagliabue). Entertainment, the aesthetic pleasure, was considered the major achievement of literature because through it could be reached intellec- tual fulfllment. The Soledades is one of the most brilliant productions of this new poetic code realized through a complex game of textual and intertextual mirror effects by which the frontiers between genres, content, and language are refected and fused. Góngora expanded the pastoral and condensed vari- ous sources in a single poem aimed to saturate the senses and the imagination of its readers, showing them “La admiración que al arte se le debe” (II, 706).

Clare College University of Cambridge

Appendix: Some Latinisms and Epithets in the “Arcadia” and the “Soledades” 1. abortaron las plantas. (I, 262) che per lo spavento de’ tuoni non si abortiscano. (X, 10) 2. de mis hijas oirás, ambiguo coro. (II, 422) gli ambigui campi. (V, 26) 3. A media rienda en tanto el anhelante caballo. (II, 966–67) stavano assise da l’atra riva affannate e anelanti. (III, 18) 4. hace de blanca espuma. (I, 559) e con certi bollori di bianche schiume. (V, 14) 5. las que siempre dará cerúleas señas. (I, 363) mille varietà di nuvoli, quali violati, quali cerulei. (V, 1) 6. al cóncavo ajustando de los cielos. (I, 99) le concave grotte. (VII, 21) 7. campo amanezca estéril de ceniza. (I, 657) o altro sterile animale involutrato si sia. (X, 37) 8. en la inculta región de aquellos riscos. (I, 320) per la asprezza de l’incolto paese. (V, 4) 9. la muda campaña. (I, 54) le tacite selve. (V, 10) 10. al que pajizo albergue los aguarda. (I, 851) insino che a le pagliaresche case fummo arrivati. (II, 4) 11. olímpica palestra. (I, 961) Góngora in Arcadia 451

ne le forti palestre. (IX, 29) 12. el pululante ramo. (I, 330) in arbor fronda, in terra erba non pulule. (XIIe, 197) 13. cerúlea ahora, ya purpúrea guía. (I, 1071) la purpurea aurora mostrarsi a’ riguardanti. (IV, 9) 14. yace en ella la robusta encina. (I, 88) e con piú aperti rami la robusta quercia. (I, 3) 15. la prolija rústica comida. (I, 856) con rustiche vivande avendo prima cacciata la fame. (III, 6) 16. Ninfas bellas y Sátiros lascivos. (I, 1079) sogliono sovente i lascivi satiri per le selve la mezza notte saltare. (V, 20) 17. armado a Pan, o semicapro a Marte. (I, 234) E ’l semicapro Pan alza le corna. (IXe, 58) 18. susurrante Amazona, Dido alada (II, 290; referring to a bee). che le susurranti api vi fusseno andate. (III, 32)

Works Cited Alonso, Dámaso. “Los hurtos de Estillani y del Chabrera.” Obras completas. Vol. 6. Madrid: Gredos, 1982. 525–39. ———. “Notas sobre el italianismo de Góngora.” Obras completas. Vol. 6. Madrid: Gredos, 1982. 331–98. Arce, Joaquín. “Sannazaro y la lengua poética castellana (De Garcilaso al siglo XVIII).” Estudios ofrecidos a Emilio Alarcos Llorach. Oviedo: Universi- dad de Oviedo, 1978. 367–85. ———. Tasso y la poesía española. Repercusión literaria y confrontación lingüística. Barcelona: Planeta, 1973. Beltrami, Pietro G. La metrica italiana. Bologna: Il Mulino, 2002. Bembo, Pietro. Prose della volgar lingua. Trattatisti del Cinquecento. Vol. 1. Ed. M. Pozzi. Milano-Napoli: Ricciardi-Mondadori, 1996. 51–284. Beverley, John R. Aspects of Góngora’s ‘Soledades.’ Amsterdam: John Ben- jamins B. V., 1980. Blanco, Mercedes. “Góngora et la peinture.” Locus Amoenus 7 (2004): 197–208. ———. “Lienzo de Flandes: las Soledades y el paisaje pictórico.” Actas del IV Congreso Internacional de la Asociación Internacional Siglo de Oro. Vol. 1. Eds. M. C. García de Enterría and A. Cordón Mesa. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá, 1998. 263–74. Bultman, Dana C. “Shipwreck as Heresy: Placing Góngora’s Poetry in the Wake of Renaissance Epic, Fray Luis, and the Christian Kabbala.” His- panic Review 70 (2002): 439–58. Cacho Casal, Rodrigo. “¿Qué captas, nocturnal, en tus canciones . . .? Edición y estudio de un soneto antigongorino de Quevedo.” Calíope 10.2 (2004): 51–71. 452 Rodrigo Cacho Casal

Callejo, Alfonso. “Tradición pastoril-piscatoria y menosprecio de corte en las Soledades de Góngora.” Cervantes and the Pastoral. Eds. J. J. Labrador Herraiz and J. Fernández Jiménez. Cleveland: Penn State University- Cleveland State University: 1986. 37–50. Carreira, Antonio. Gongoremas. Barcelona: Península, 1998. Chiodo, Domenico. L’idillio barocco e altre bagatelle. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso, 2000. ——. “Tra l’Aminta e il Pastor fido.” Italianistica 24 (1995): 559–75. Collins, Marsha S. The ‘Soledades,’ Góngora’s Masque of the Imagination. Columbia and London: University of Missouri Press, 2002. Corti, Maria. Nuovi metodi e fantasmi. Milano: Feltrinelli, 2001. Covarrubias, Sebastián de. Tesoro de la lengua castellana o española. Ed. M. de Riquer. Barcelona: Alta Fulla, 1998. Crawford, J. P. Wickersham. “Italian Sources of Góngora’s Poetry.” Romanic Review 20 (1929): 122–30. Dällenbach, Lucien. Le Récit spéculaire. Essai sur la mise en abyme. Paris: Seuil, 1977. De Armas, Frederick A. “Embracing Hercules / Enjoying Ganymede: The Ho- moerotics of Humanism in Góngora’s Soledad primera.” Calíope 8.1 (2002): 125– 40. Díaz de Rivas, Pedro. Discursos apologéticos por el estilo del ‘Polifemo’ y ‘Soledades.’ Eunice Joiner Gates, ed. Documentos gongorinos. México: El Colegio de México, 1960. 31–67. Edwards, Gwynne. “The Theme of Nature in Góngora’s Soledades.” BHS 55 (1978): 231– 43. Egido, Aurora. “La silva en la poesía andaluza del Barroco (Con un ex- curso sobre Estacio y las obrecillas de Fray Luis).” Criticón 46 (1989): 5–39. ———. “‘Sin poética hay poetas.’ Sobre la teoría de la égloga en el Siglo de Oro.” Criticón 30 (1985): 43–77. Fernández de Córdoba, Francisco. Examen del ‘Antídoto’ o Apología por las ‘Soledades.’ Miguel Artigas. Don Luis de Góngora y Argote. Biografía y estudio crítico. Madrid: Real Academia Española, 1925. 400–67. ———. Parecer acerca de las ‘Soledades’ a instancia de su autor. Emilio Oro- zco Díaz. En torno a las ‘Soledades’ de Góngora. Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1969. 130– 45. Folena, Gianfranco. La crisi linguistica del Quattrocento e l’‘Arcadia’ di I. Sannazaro. Firenze: Olschki, 1952. Fucilla, Joseph G. Estudios sobre el petrarquismo en España. Madrid: CSIC, 1960. García Rodríguez, Javier and Pedro Conde Parrado. “Entre voces y ecos: Quevedo contra Góngora (una vez más).” Edad de Oro 24 (2005): 107– 44. Garcilaso de la Vega. Obra poética y textos en prosa. Ed. B. Morros. Barce- lona: Crítica, 1995. Góngora in Arcadia 453

Gargano, Antonio. “La égloga en Nápoles entre Sannazaro y Garcilaso.” La égloga. VI Encuentro Internacional sobre Poesía del Siglo de Oro. Ed. B. López Bueno. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2002. 57–76. Gómez, Jesús. “Sobre la teoría de la bucólica en el Siglo de Oro: hacia las églogas de Garcilaso.” Dicenda 10 (1991–1992): 111–26. Góngora, Luis de. Soledades. Ed. R. Jammes. Madrid: Castalia, 1994. Gornall, J. F. G. “Góngora’s Soledades: ‘alabanza de aldea’ without ‘menos- precio de corte?’.” BHS 59 (1982): 21–25. Guarini, Battista. Il pastor fido. Ed. L. Fassò. Torino: Einaudi, 1976. ———. Il Verrato. Opere. Ed. M. Guglielminetti. Torino: UTET, 1971. 729–821. Hart, Thomas R. “The Pilgrim’s Role in the First Solitude.” MLN 92 (1977): 213–26. Herrera, Fernando de. Anotaciones a la poesía de Garcilaso. Eds. I. Pepe and J. M. Reyes. Madrid: Cátedra, 2001. Infantas y Mendoza, Antonio de las. Carta respondiendo a la que [se] es- cribió a don Luis de Góngora en razón de las ‘Soledades.’ Emilio Orozco Díaz. En torno a las ‘Soledades’ de Góngora. Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1969. 249–57. Jammes, Robert. La obra poética de don Luis de Góngora y Argote. Trans. M. Moya. Madrid: Castalia, 1987. ———, ed. Luis de Góngora. Soledades. Madrid. Castalia: 1994. Jáuregui, Juan de. Aminta traducido de Torquato Tasso. Ed. J. Arce. Madrid: Castalia, 1970. ———. Antídoto contra la pestilente poesía de las ‘Soledades.’ Ed. J. M. Rico García. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2002. Komanecky, Peter M. “Epic and Pastoral in Garcilaso’s Eclogues.” MLN 86 (1971): 154–66. La Marca, Rosa Rita. “I giuochi funebri nell’Arcadia di Iacobo Sannazzaro.” Siculorum Gymnasium 27 (1974): 514–35. Lapesa, Rafael. La trayectoria poética de Garcilaso. Madrid: Revista de Oc- cidente, 1948. Lida de Malkiel, María Rosa. La tradición clásica en España. Barcelona: Ariel, 1975. López Bueno, Begoña. “La égloga, género de géneros.” La égloga. VI Encuen- tro Internacional sobre Poesía del Siglo de Oro. Ed. B. López Bueno. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2002. 9–21. ———, ed. La silva. I Encuentro Internacional sobre Poesía del Siglo de Oro. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 1991. López Estrada, Francisco. Los libros de pastores en la literatura española. La órbita previa. Madrid: Gredos: 1974. Ly, Nadine. “Las Soledades: ‘. . . esta poesía inútil . . .’.” Criticón 30 (1985): 7– 42. 454 Rodrigo Cacho Casal

Man, Paul de. Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Ni- etzsche, Rilke, and Proust. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1979. Martini, Alessandro. “Ritratto del madrigale poetico fra Cinque e Seicento.” Lettere Italiane 33 (1981): 529– 48. Micó, José María. De Góngora. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva, 2001. Molho, Maurice. Semántica y poética (Góngora, Quevedo). Barcelona: Crítica, 1977. Morpurgo-Tagliabue, Guido. Anatomia del Barocco. Palermo: Aesthetica, 1998. Pellicer, Joseph. Lecciones solemnes a las obras de don Luis de Góngora y Ar- gote, Píndaro andaluz, príncipe de los poetas líricos de España. Madrid: Imprenta del Reino, a costa de Pedro Coello, 1630. Pérez-Abadín Barro, Soledad. Resonare silvas. La tradición bucólica en la poesía del siglo XVI. Santiago de Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 2004. Poggi, Giulia. “Petrarquismo (y antipetrarquismo) en los sonetos de Góngora: ¿cinco casos de intertextualidad?” Góngora hoy I-II-III. Ed. J. Roses. Córdoba: Diputación de Córdoba, 2002. 179–99. ———. “Un soneto de Góngora y su fuente italiana (‘Urnas plebeyas, túmu- los reales’).” Estado actual de los estudios sobre el Siglo de Oro. Actas del II Congreso Internacional de Hispanistas del Siglo de Oro. Vol. 2. Eds. M. García Martín, I. Arellano, J. Blasco, and M. Vitse. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca, 1993. 787–93. Poggioli, Renato. The Oaten Flute: Essays on Pastoral Poetry and the Pastoral Ideal. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1975. Ponce Cárdenas, Jesús. “El epitalamio barroco: algunas notas sobre la nar- ratio mítica.” Estudios sobre tradición clásica y mitología en el Siglo de Oro. Eds. I. Colón Calderón and J. Ponce Cárdenas. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas, 2002. 83–94. Porcacchi, Tommaso, ed. Arcadia di M. Iacopo Sannazaro nuovamente cor- retta, & ornata d’alcune annotationi. Vinegia: Gabriel Giolito de’ Fer- rari, 1567. Primera parte de las Flores de poetas ilustres de España. Ed. P. Espinosa. Val- ladolid: Luys Sanchez, 1605. Reyes Cano, Rogelio. La ‘Arcadia’ de Sannazaro en España. Sevilla: Univer- sidad de Sevilla, 1973. Rivers, Elias L. “Nature, Art and Science in Spanish Poetry of the Renais- sance.” BHS 44 (1967): 255–66. ———. “The Pastoral Paradox of Natural Art.” MLN 77 (1962): 130– 44. ———. “La problemática silva española.” NRFH 36 (1988): 249–60. Romanos, Melchora. “Los escritores italianos y Góngora desde la perspectiva de sus comentaristas.” Filología 21.1 (1986): 117– 41. Roses Lozano, Joaquín. “Hibridaciones dramático-poéticas: égloga y disfraz en las Soledades.” Studia Aurea. Actas del III Congreso de la AISO. Vol. Góngora in Arcadia 455

1. Eds. I. Arellano, M. C. Pinillos, F. Serralta and M. Vitse. Toulouse- Pamplona: LEMSO-GRISO, 1996. 495–500. ———. Una poética de la oscuridad. La recepción crítica de las ‘Soledades’ en el siglo XVII. Madrid-Londres: Támesis, 1994. Rozas, Juan Manuel and Antonio Quilis. “Epístola de Manuel Ponce al conde de Villamediana en defensa del léxico culterano.” RFE 44 (1961): 411–23. Ruiz Pérez, Pedro. “Égloga, silva, soledad.” La égloga. VI Encuentro Inter- nacional sobre Poesía del Siglo de Oro. Ed. B. López Bueno. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2002. 387– 429. Saccone, Eduardo. “L’Arcadia di Iacobo Sannazaro: storia e delineamento di una struttura.” MLN 84 (1969): 46–97. Sánchez Robayna, Andrés. Silva gongorina. Madrid: Cátedra, 1993. Salcedo Coronel, García de, ed. Soledades de D. Luis de Góngora comentadas. Madrid: Imprenta Real, a costa de Domingo González, 1636. Sannazaro, Iacopo. Arcadia. Ed. F. Erspamer. Milano: Mursia, 1990. Sansovino, Francesco, ed. L’Arcadia di M. Iacomo Sannazaro di nuovo riveduta, corretta et adornata. Venetia: Francesco Rampazetto, 1559. Schnabel, Doris R. El pastor poeta. Fernando de Herrera y la tradición lírica pastoril en el primer siglo áureo. Kassel: Edition Reichenberger, 1996. Scorza, Maria. Góngora e Chiabrera. Napoli: Ricciardi, 1934. Smith, Paul Julian. “Barthes, Góngora, and Non-Sense.” PMLA 101 (1986): 82–94. Thomas, Lucien-Paul. Góngora et le gongorisme considérés dans leurs rap- ports avec le marinisme. Paris: Champion, 1911. Trambaioli, Marcella. “Ecos de la lírica de Luigi Tansillo en los versos gong- orinos.” Criticón 77 (1999): 53–70. Valencia, Pedro de. Carta a Góngora en censura de sus poesías. Manuel María Pérez López. Pedro de Valencia, primer crítico gongorino. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca, 1988. 55–82. Vega, Lope de. Rimas humanas y divinas del Licenciado Tomé de Burguillos y La Gatomaquia. Ed. A. Carreño. Salamanca: Almar, 2002. Vilanova, Antonio. Erasmo y Cervantes. Barcelona: Lumen, 1989. ———. Las fuentes y los temas del ‘Polifemo’ de Góngora. 2 vols. Madrid: CSIC, 1957. Vossler, Karl. La soledad en la poesía española. Trans. J. M. Sacristán. Madrid: Revista de Occidente, 1941. Waley, Pamela. “Some Uses of Classical Mythology in the Soledades of Gón- gora.” BHS 36 (1959): 193–209. Walker, Steven F. “Góngora’s Soledad Primera: an Epic Amplification of Pas- toral Themes.” Kentucky Romance Quarterly 28 (1981): 371–81. Woods, M. J. The Poet and the Natural World in the Age of Góngora. Oxford: , 1978.