Humanismo, gramática y poesía: Juan de Mena y los auctores en el canon de Nebrija by Juan Casas Rigall (review)

Abstract

Reviewed by: Humanismo, gramática y poesía: Juan de Mena y los auctores en el canon de Nebrija by Juan Casas Rigall Daniel Hartnett Casas Rigall, Juan. Humanismo, gramática y poesía: Juan de Mena y los auctores en el canon de Nebrija. USC Editora Académica 1. Santiago de Compostela: Universidade, Servizo de Publicacións e Intercambio Científico, 2010. 213 pages. ISBN 978-84-9887-386-3 Juan Casas Rigall’s Humanismo, gramática y poesía: Juan de Mena y los auctores en el canon de Nebrija analyzes the nature of the auctores in the work of Nebrija in order to evaluate the role of Mena and other fifteenth-century literary figures as examples of grammar and literature. In part, this study stems from the disagreement between María Rosa Lida and Francisco Rico regarding Nebrija’s assessment of Juan de Mena and his contemporaries as exemplars. These two figures of twentieth century criticism adopted opposite stances on the question, with Lida arguing “Puede inferirse […] la preeminencia absoluta que Nebrija otorgaba a Mena” (332) and Rico responding “Nebrija no estima a Mena ni como pattern de ‘uso’ lingüístico ni como ‘autor’ de literatura valiosa” (136). Casas Rigall turns this unresolved issue into an opportunity to deepen understanding of the question at hand by exploring Nebrija’s place in the classical and medieval tradition and what can be surmised from Nebrija’s broader works and biography. [End Page 234] By placing the nature of the auctoritas within its historical setting among the works of Quintilian, Valla, and other authors of grammars and their common practices, Casas Rigall illuminates the expectations that Nebrija fulfills in order to supply his works with Castilian and Latin grammar examples. He begins by adeptly demonstrating the changing nature of the role of auctores in grammatical works across time from one of many criteria in grammatical correctness in older texts to the primary point of departure for grammar texts by Nebrija’s time. By arguing that Nebrija followed the established tradition to seek out examples for his grammar texts, Casas Rigall concludes that no reproach of Mena is apparent in Nebrija’s Gramática. Though Nebrija does not praise Mena in the Gramática, tradition dictates that there was no expectation that he should do so. Rather, Nebrija praises Mena’s work overtly in the commentary to his Vafre dicta philosophorum, stating “Hoc pulchre noster Johannes Mena expressit atque imitatus est” in reference to Diogenes Laertius, while referring to Mena throughout as poeta noster” (Casas Rigall 36). In response to Rico’s claim that Nebrija criticizes Mena’s work by making him the example of grammatical vices, Casas Rigall explains that the decision to exemplify grammatical vices with Mena’s verses is simply a didactic habit inherited from earlier grammars. Mena’s are largely pardoned for any potential transgressions they exhibit because they can be attributed to poetic license. In the same vein, earlier grammars did not criticize Virgil by using verses from the Aeneid as examples of vices; poetry can necessitate grammatical vices. In contrast, Casas Rigall argues that the examples of vices in the Gramática that reproduce sentences of prose, particularly those of Enrique de Villena, are indeed intended to criticize their inelegant usage because prose does not enjoy this same caveat. Though not its stated goal, Casas Rigall’s volume subtly succeeds in connecting Nebrija to his foreign and domestic past, present, and future. Nebrija emerges as a participant in scholarly traditions, spanning centuries, who takes it upon himself to wed inherited models with new content. By situating Nebrija and Mena vis-à-vis Latin grammars, Italian humanist thought, early printing in Castile, political ideology contemporary to Nebrija, Golden Age reception, and other areas of knowledge, Casas Rigall shows the interconnectedness and relevance of these two figures to an exceptionally broad web of cultural references. At times, this rises to the level of challenging such entrenched divisions as pre-modern vs. early modern, domestic vs. foreign, or Latin tradition vs vernacular tradition. [End Page 235] Nebrija appears as the figure who straddles these divisions as he weighs how to incorporate Mena into his project. The stages in Casas...