THE LIBRARY OF IBERIAN RESOURCES ONLINE

The Mendoza Family in the Spanish Renaissance 1350-1550 Helen Nader Introduction
[1] I do not have to do anything which might prejudice my loyalty or that to which I am committed, nor anything different from what my ancestors did.(1) These proud and defiant words were written by the second count of Tendilla, Iigo !pe" de #endo"a (1$$%&1'1') && governor of the newly con(uered )ingdom of *ranada+ a ,astilian nobleman intensely loyal to )ing -ernando the ,atholic+ a seigneurial lord with life and death jurisdiction over hundreds of tenants+ a landlord dependent upon agricultural rents for his income+ a man whose intellect and world& view were formed in the #endo"a family household in the provincial capital of *uadalajara, far from universities, urban society, and the royal court. .lthough we should e/pect Tendilla0s attitudes to be provincial and medieval, humanist contemporaries considered him to be one of the lights of ,astilian intellectual life. In an inscription sculpted in marble in imitation of the ancient 1omans, he described himself as 2*3431. I5 *1.4.T345I5 13*4I. ,.6IT.4375 ., I I831IT.4917# .1,I7# 61I#75 61.3-3,TI5.2(%) Tendilla thus saw himself not as a medieval )night commanding the ,astilian fortress of the .lhambra but as the military governor of the ancient 1oman acropolis of Ill:beris && a self&perception we would e/pect to find in one of his urban, republican contemporaries in 1enaissance -lorence. In 1;1<, 3l:as Tormo reali"ed the significance of this inscription and investigated all the inscriptions composed by Tendilla, as well as each of the buildings he commissioned. Tormo found that Tendilla and his uncle, cardinal #endo"a, first introduced the architectural and monumental styles of the Italian 1enaissance into 5pain and, with great e/citement, he concluded that 2to the #endo"as of the fifteenth century [2] and, more specifically, to the Tendillas, so unjustly obscured and forgotten, we are indebted for the beginning of the 1enaissance in 5panish monuments.2(=) This conclusion fitted neatly into the traditional interpretation that humanism was brought into ,astile by Italian humanists during the reign of the ,atholic #onarchs (1$<$&1'>$), in particular by 6ietro #artire d0.nghiera (1$'<&1'%?) && a #ilanese humanist whom Tendilla brought from Italy in 1$@< on his return from an embassy to the papacy.($) 9n the basis of this evidence, Tendilla has borne for more than fifty years the distinction of being the 2importer of the 1enaissance2 into ,astile. #ore recently, AosB ,epeda .dCn has noted a more conservative side of Tendilla0s character, characteri"ing him as a transitional figure who bridged the medieval world of fifteenth&century ,astile and the 1enaissance world of the si/teenth&century 2new monarchies.2(') 6olitically, ,epeda sees in Tendilla a continual vacillation between 2a yesterday which he ma)es resound with chivalrous deeds and a today which ma)es him thin) in the political rigidity of a state construed along new 1enaissance lines.2 .ccording to ,epeda, this vacillation stemmed from Tendilla0s conflicting loyalties && to his own rebellious noble class, on the one hand, and to )ing -ernando (the archetypal #achiavellian 1enaissance monarch), on the other. Tendilla0s rhetoric and personality therefore demonstrate ambivalence, even vacillation, between the medieval and the 1enaissance && between 2this proud and vigorous #endo"a who dismisses an opponent with a peremptory and une(uivocal phrase and the astute 1enaissance politician who calculates and waits, and who )nows the 0virtD0 of manipulating

men.2 These 1enaissance contradictions in a medieval man ,epeda attributes to 2the transcendental voyage to Italy.2 To ,epeda, Tendilla is the symbol of a 5pain torn between the values of a native, medieval, and agrarian tradition and those of foreign, modern, and urban origin && a view of 5panish intellectual history first e/pressed in the fifteenth century and still universally accepted by 5panish historians. Eere we to accept the assumption that there was no 1enaissance in ,astile before the reign of the ,atholic #onarchs, Tendilla would indeed deserve his reputation as the introducer of the 1enaissance into 5pain. To ma)e such a sharp brea) with the past, however, would have been a revolutionary move, and (as ,epeda has indicated) Tendilla was most conservative. 4evertheless, he did not feel torn between a medieval past and a 1enaissance future. Tendilla0s loyalty lay only to one part of the pastF what his ancestors had done and, specifically, what his grandfather and great&grandfathers had accomplished at the beginning of the [ ] fifteenth century in raising the #endo"a family to the social, political, and intellectual leadership of ,astile. These accomplishments were recorded in the histories and poetry written by the #endo"a themselves as early as 1=;' and over the generations formed a family tradition. 8etween this tradition and the demands of the ,atholic #onarchs, Tendilla did face conflicting loyaltiesF during the reign of -ernando and Isabel, the royal government increasingly rejected the 1enaissance values Tendilla proudly and with good reason identified with his own family. To accept the new values of the royal court, the #endo"a of the si/teenth century would have had to reject the 1enaissance political, religious, and esthetic values they found in their ancestors0 prose and poetry. Tendilla0s refusal to deviate 2from what GhisH ancestors did2 actually represented his commitment to the #endo"a family0s 1enaissance past. Tendilla and the other #endo"a of the TrastCmara period (1=?;&1'1?) both revered the ancestors who had created the family0s power and fortune and immortali"ed the ancestral memory by repeating the family0s glorious names for generation after generation. 8ut the family had few illusions about its true origins or the nature of its power. Ehen Tendilla spo)e of his ancestors, he spo)e of the five outstanding figures of the previous four generationsF his father, Iigo !pe" de #endo"a, first count of Tendilla (d. 1$<;)+ his uncle, 6edro *on"Cle" de #endo"a, cardinal of 5anta ,roce (d. 1$;')+ his grandfather, Iigo !pe" de #endo"a, mar(uis of 5antillana (d. 1$'@)+ his great&grandfather, Iiego Jurtado de #endo"a, admiral of ,astile (d. 1$>$)+ and his great&great&grandfather, 6edro *on"Cle" de #endo"a (d. 1=@'), mayordomo mayor (high steward) to )ing Auan I (1=<;&1=;>). The #endo"a viewed the family in a historical perspective typical of the 1enaissanceF they did not push the family0s ,astilian and aristocratic origins bac) to a time before the founder of the family0s fortunes && 6edro *on"Cle" de #endo"a (d. 1=@') && became active in ,astilian military and administrative affairs. 4or did they attribute the family0s spectacular rise in ,astilian society to loyalty to the crown or to some other lofty principle. The #endo"a recogni"ed that their aristocratic status was no older than the TrastCmara dynasty itself and that it was the product of their ancestors0 political agility in serving && with both sword and pen && that revolutionary and illegitimate dynasty. .t the same time, they admired the ancient 1omans0 ability to combine worldly careers with artistic sensibilities, and they consciously cast themselves and their ancestors as the spiritual heirs of the ancient 1omans in 5pain && men of arms and letters. That the #endo"a developed an important intellectual tradition is not an entirely new idea in Jispanic studies. -or more than a century, [!] the coincidence that many of ,astile0s greatest poets and historians in the fifteenth and si/teenth centuries && including *arcilaso de la Kega, *!me" and Aorge #anri(ue, Iiego Jurtado de #endo"a, -ernCn 6Bre" de *u"mCn, and the mar(uis of 5antillana && were members of the e/tended family descended from 6edro !pe" de .yala0s father has intrigued scholars.(?) 8ut this melding of family and literary tradition has inspired neither studies of the #endo"a0s role in a ,astilian 1enaissance nor investigations of family history in ,astile. 5cholars have concentrated instead on more

glamorous or more sensational figures && Isabel the ,atholic or the conversos && as mobili"ers of an Italianate 1enaissance in ,astile. The intellectual distance between Italian culture and the ,astilian mind seemed so great that only the power of enlightened )ings or the desperation of a persecuted minority appeared capable of bridging the gap. Thus the chronological inconsistencies, self& contradictions, and insularity of these traditional analyses have not prevented them from becoming the established interpretation, even among serious scholars && largely because there seemed to be no other alternative. Traditional histories repeat the generally accepted position that the 1enaissance came to 5pain from Italy in the wa)e of the political reforms of the ,atholic #onarchs, who brought peace, enlightened government, and justice to ,astile and so ended Jispanic isolation from 3urope and an endemic civil warfare which had prevented indigenous cultural development. .ccording to this theory, Isabel0s father, Auan II, did encourage literature but failed to control the rebellious nobility+ and her half&brother, 3nri(ue IK (1$'$&1$<$), allowed the political situation to degenerate further so that ,astilian civili"ation fell to the level of a corrupt, rebellious, and anti&intellectual aristocracy. 9nce the ,atholic #onarchs had established civil peace in the )ingdom in 1$;%, however, they were able to introduce the Italian 1enaissance into 5pain. Isabel, especially eager to raise the intellectual level of her )ingdom, and cardinal ,isneros inspired a new age of cultural activity and provided a foundation for it by introducing educational reformsF Isabel established a school at the royal court and hired Italian humanists to teach not only her own children, who were tutored by the *eraldini brothers, but the sons of the nobility as well+ ,isneros founded the 7niversity of .lcalC where his 6olyglot 8ible, edited by Italian&trained humanists, set the model for the development of 1enaissance scholarship. The theory has further claimed that although the fruits of this endeavor did not && and could not && fully ripen until well into the si/teenth century, when ,astilian fanaticism gave way to a more 3uropean openness, the political and educational reforms of the ,atholic #onarchs laid the foundations for the *olden ["] .ge of 5panish literature and culture && the true intellectual 1enaissance of the reign of ,harles K (1'1@& 1'''). 6erhaps the most elo(uent statement of this historical tradition appeared as recently as 1;?1F The age of -erdinand and Isabella was 5pain0s springtime, a spacious time of heroic deeds, of creative ardor, of cascading national energies. 7nder these talented and energetic monarchs 5pain emerged from her medieval isolation to assume the first place among the powers of 3urope. The turbulent ,astilian nobility was tamed, the #oors were e/pelled, the 5panish )ingdoms united in the pursuit of common goals. Industry and trade were encouraged, and 5panish literature and art were launched on a glorious course.(<) Jistorians of all nationalities accept this view && one of the few things about 5pain on which all agree. 4ot long ago, A. J. 3lliott presented a new synthesis of the traditional theory. Je described ,astile under the ,atholic #onarchs as 2an open society, eager for, and receptive to, contemporary foreign ideas2+ and he further proposed that during the reign of ,harles K the 2open 5pain2 became the policy of a political faction led by the #endo"a, while the du)e of .lba led a more /enophobic group whose position 3lliott called the 2closed 5pain2 policy. 3lliott0s association of the si/teenth&century 1enaissance with a political party is innovative, although in other respects he has retained the traditional interpretation of 5panish intellectual history in which the triumph of the ,ounter 1eformation in the reign of 6hilip II (1'''&1';@) mar)ed the triumph of ,astilian conservatism over the new, liberal, and dynamic attitudes of 1enaissance and 1eformation 3urope and insured all those disastrous results )nown collectively as 2the decline of 5pain.2(@) 7nfortunately, this traditional interpretation has never wor)ed. It is based largely on the self&serving claims of the Italians themselves && 6ietro #artire d0.nghiera, ucio #arineo 5:culo, and -rancesco

*uicciardini && and on the assumption that the Italian 1enaissance flourished late in the fifteenth century. 4ot only did the Italian 1enaissance originate much earlier, but it is difficult (if not impossible) to discover any society or group of scholars active in late&fifteenth&century 3urope who could have provided the inspiration for a renaissance in the 5pain of the ,atholic #onarchs. ,ertainly it would be difficult to find a more pedantic && or more pompous && scholar than 6ietro #artire, the ,atholic #onarchs0 Italian humanist&in&residence+ and scholars have not been able to discover any si/teenth&century writer && humanist or otherwise && whom he [#] educated or substantially influenced. (;) ucio #arineo had the talent to inspire a renaissance, but his views on rhetoric were so opposed to those of 5panish humanists trained at 8ologna and his connections with ,astilian society so slight that he had little effect on the intellectual life of ,astile. Indeed, his famous 2humanist2 history may have been plagiari"ed from a 5panish vernacular chronicle.(1>) 4or do *uicciardini0s superficial )nowledge of ,astile and anti&5panish prejudices commend him as a source of information on ,astile.(11) The *eraldini brothers came to 5pain as children and received their education in ,astile+ they could not have imported humanism from Italy.(1%) 5panish literature provides even less evidence for the impact of the Italian 1enaissance during the reign of the ,atholic #onarchs, for this period is one of the most conservative in the history of 5panish literature. 9nly two wor)s stand out from the general mediocrity of the time && #anri(ue0s Coplas por la muerte de su padre (1$<?) and 1ojas0s La Celestina (c. 1$;;) && as brilliant syntheses of themes and attitudes that were commonplaces of fifteenth&century ,astile. 4othing produced at the court of the ,atholic #onarchs fits any modern definition of 1enaissance poetry or prose. Thus maintaining the traditional theory in the face of such uncooperative evidence necessitates some curious chronological jugglingF humanist wor)s written in the first half of the fifteenth century are labeled 2proto& 1enaissance2+ or being recogni"ed as humanist, they are pronounced to belong to the last years of the century so they can, by chronological association, be attributed to the influence of the ,atholic #onarchs.(1=) 3ven the advent of printing came inconveniently for the traditional interpretationF because the first boo) printed in ,astile appeared during the reign of the despised 3nri(ue IK, the 1$<% 5egovian edition has to be 2considered as a most e/emplary anticipation2 of the cultural and religious activity of the ,atholic #onarchy.(1$) The evidence for a 1enaissance in ,astile in the early si/teenth century is slightly better. *arcilaso de la Kega (1'>1&1'=?) wrote the first successful 6etrarchan sonnets in ,astilian.(1') .lthough no one would deny the genius and lyric beauty of *arcilaso0s poetry, forty sonnets ma)e a rather puny 1enaissance. #oreover, scholars now dispute whether his model was the wor) of the ,atalan poet .us:as #arch or the Italian sonnet tradition he encountered while fighting in Italy. Thus, the importation of Italian humanists into ,astile during the reign of the ,atholic #onarchs does not e/plain any Italianate ,astilian 1enaissance of the fifteenth century+ it does not even demonstrate the e/istence of such an intellectual movement. In short, the 1enaissance of [$] the ,atholic #onarchs has been constructed by so labeling any respectable wor) of literature written during their reign (regardless of whether or not the wor) is in fact 1enaissance in character) and by ta)ing materials from other periods and attributing them to the period of the ,atholic #onarchs through 2anticipation2 or 2delayed inspiration.2(1?) Ehen historians of the Italian 1enaissance want to comment about the 5panish 1enaissance and depend for their information upon Jispanists devoted to the proposition that there could not have been a 1enaissance in ,astile before the reign of -ernando and Isabel, and when these same scholars e/amine the literary wor)s of the reign of -ernando and Isabel and find nothing during or after the period that could be defined as 1enaissance, it is no wonder that they conclude that there was no 1enaissance in ,astile or that it arrived late or that it had only a superficial importance.(1<) Thus the

traditional interpretation of the 1enaissance in ,astile, by focusing attention on the reign of the ,atholic #onarchs and perpetuating a series of gratuitous assumptions about the early fifteenth century, has become one of the greatest obstacles to the study of the ,astilian 1enaissance by scholars trained in the modern discipline of 1enaissance studies. The result has been belief in an ever&widening gap between the brilliant accomplishments of the Italian 1enaissance and the purported bac)wardness of fifteenth&century ,astile && a gap which reflects the present state of scholarship rather than the true differences between 5pain and northern Italy. Ehile the present analysis may detract from the tradition that considers -ernando and Isabel the transcendental figures of 5panish intellectual history, it has the advantage of offering an approach and a perspective that ma)e sense of otherwise contradictory and dissonant materials. This is particularly true of the problem which has most seriously plagued studies of fifteenth&century ,astilian intellectual historyF the need to e/plain the creation of 1enaissance humanist literature by a society that did not fit any modern stereotype of a 1enaissance society. 6revious attempts to e/plain away this contradiction by attributing the ,astilian 1enaissance to Italianate influences have foundered on the problem of chronology, for the proven borrowings from 1enaissance Italy occurred after the appearance of 1enaissance literature in ,astile. The present study, by focusing on the #endo"a family in its most innovative and prolific periods, presents both a new chronology of the 5panish 1enaissance and a new interpretation of not only its social and intellectual origins but also its development in relation to the wider 3uropean 1enaissance. Throughout this boo), 5panish culture will be compared with the Italian 1enaissance && a 1enaissance, however, that Aacob 8urc)hardt [%] would hardly recogni"e. It is a 1enaissance fervently religious, anti&scholastic, and voluntarist. It is a 1enaissance in which the republican city&states, rather than 8urc)hardt0s despotisms, loo) to classical anti(uity for legitimacy. .nd it is a 1enaissance of the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries rather than 8urc)hardt0s sprawling fifteenth and si/teenth centuries. In this 1enaissance, the old heroes of the 8urc)hardtian interpretation && #achiavelli, eonardo, #ichelangelo, 1aphael, ,astiglione && are replaced by a much earlier group && 6etrarch, 5alutati, 8runi, Ionatello, 8runelleschi, and #asaccio && a group in many ways more interesting because it comprises the innovators, the instigators, the creators of the historiographical, artistic, and rhetorical tradition upon which the more famous geniuses of the Jigh 1enaissance capitali"ed. This more recent view of the Italian 1enaissance, developed largely by historians in the 7nited 5tates under the influence of Jans 8aron0s Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance,(1@) has been the product of many of the same methods used by the 1enaissance humanists themselves. Jistorians have focused their attention on the prose writings (especially religious and historical) of the humanist tradition. #odern scholars have e/amined the content, structure, style, and rhetorical effect of each wor) in its entirety and placed each in its own cultural and social ambience. This 2.merican school2 of 1enaissance historiography has hardly penetrated the scholarship of other countries+ and this boo), as far as I )now, is the first attempt to apply its definitions and methods to 5panish intellectual history. The values on which the 1enaissance was built were laid out in the fourteenth century by intellectuals who regarded the problems then besetting ,hristians as manifestations of a widespread moral malaise. To -rancesco 6etrarch (1=>$&1=<$), 2the first 1enaissance man,2 the most pressing needs were to bring men to a lively personal awareness of ,hristian truth and to find practical moral guidelines for daily ,hristian life. Je believed that by the cultivation of the will && by appealing more to man0s emotional and arational nature than to reason && this malaise could be healed. In the beauty of the atin classics, 6etrarch and his fellow humanists found a sensual e/perience that filled them with the joy of *od. They hoped to give the same joyous e/perience to others by presenting the familiar classics in their purest and thus most beautiful form, by finding new te/ts, and by writing imitations of the classics. These intellectuals assumed that the person who could be led to the love of *od through such an esthetic e/perience would naturally be inspired to conduct his life in an ethical fashion+ and to this end,

they set out to present guidelines ta)en from the atin classicsF 5eneca0s letters with [&] their homey, practical morality+ the histories of ivy and Kalerius #a/imus with their edifying e/amples from the hives of the ancient 1omans+ and pagan poetry, such as the 2 abors of Jercules,2 with its vivid e/position of ethical dilemmas. The humanists0 passionate approach to ,hristian living through the rhetoric of the classics brought them simultaneously to reject many of the highest intellectual values of the medieval universities and adopt a historical perspective in which the #iddle .ges appeared as a brea) with rather than a continuation of the ancient world. To 6etrarch, the university professors with their scholastic methods not only were unfit to solve the practical moral and religious problems of the day but also were unaware of them. The very premises of scholasticism && ordering )nowledge into rational and hierarchical categories and building arguments from premise through logical steps to rationally incontrovertible conclusion && were irrelevant to everyday living. 3ven if the scholastics did arrive at a correct substantive point, 6etrarch believed, they could never inspire that feeling of awe and admiration for the truth necessary to generate an act of will because they presented their arguments in inelegant and corrupt atin. 6etrarch therefore dismissed the greatest intellectual achievements of the #iddle .ges as inappropriate and ugly. The only portions of the university0s curriculum the humanists considered useful to their objectives were moral philosophy and the esthetic disciplines of grammar and rhetoric. -or 6etrarch and others, the best e/amples of even these disciplines were to be found not in the wor)s of the medieval scholastics but in the atin wor)s of anti(uity. 6etrarch did not need to discover lost or previously un)nown classics to arrive at this conclusionF his models of persuasion and beauty were well )nown in the #iddle .ges. 8y see)ing moral and esthetic e/amples in these familiar wor)s, however, 6etrarch shed new light on the classics and gave them new life. Ehereas the scholastics had mined the classics for rational definitions and logical methods, 6etrarch and his fellow humanists loo)ed to them for historical e/amples in the lives of illustrious men and for a rhetoric that would appeal to the irrational or arational elements in man0s character. Thus the favorite classical authors of the early 1enaissance were not the philosophical giants && 6lato and .ristotle && but the rhetorical geniuses && ivy, ,icero, and 5t. .ugustine. .lthough 6etrarch owed more to medieval scholasticism than he was willing to admit, he inspired generations of humanists who accepted his radical shift in values from the rational to the emotional, from logic to rhetoric. 6etrarch wrote as a private citi"en driven to see) new answers to (uestions raised by the institutional and religious collapse of the fourteenth&century [1'] church. Jis most innovative disciples, however, were employees of a public body && the -lorentine 1epublic. -aced with the need to find solutions to serious political problems && a collapsing war against #ilan, wea)ening political connections with 4aples, the stress of relations with a non&1oman and divided papacy, and the collapse of the republican form of government && and to ma)e these solutions palatable to the public, 6etrarch0s followers also turned to the classics. In his younger years, ,oluccio 5alutati (1==1&1$>?) received religious inspiration from 9vid0s imagery, just as 6etrarch was inspired by ,icero0s elo(uence. Iuring the most desperate hours of the -lorentine war against #ilan, ,oluccio, as chancellor, was responsible for drafting the city0s official propaganda. Je reali"ed that ,icero0s speeches against monarchy contained arguments that could inspire the -lorentines, in the name of republicanism, to endure the sacrifices necessary to carry on the struggle against a despotic adversary. 8y drawing a parallel between republican 1ome and republican -lorence, ,oluccio himself inspired his disciple and successor, eonardo 8runi .retino (c. 1=<>&1$$$), to carry the parallel even further. In his History of Florence, 8runi described -lorence as the heir of the ancient 1oman 1epublic and suggested that other forms of government were derivative of a medieval && and therefore corrupt && tradition. In thus responding to a variety of immediate practical problems, the humanists came to write history from a new perspective. In their efforts to emulate classical anti(uity && the living faith of early ,hristianity, the ethical conduct of the ancient 1omans, the persuasive elo(uence of classical atin && they studied classical wor)s intensely and in their entirety and recogni"ed each wor) as the product of a

single person, in a particular society, at a specific time. This relativistic and particularistic approach shaped the humanists0 views of both history and society. 1ather than seeing the past as a record of *od0s judgment on men, or as a cycle, or as a decline from an ideal state, they regarded each historical period as uni(ue and of interest for precisely this reason. Instead of defining a single political and social order as ideal and measuring the world against this standard, the humanists judged each society according to how well it suited its own time, place, and circumstances. In changing content and perspective, the humanists also changed the form in which they presented their ideas. In the #iddle .ges, the greatest minds generally wrote philosophical treatises, each of which might re(uire several volumes to e/plicate a single, unified yet comple/ argument. The 1enaissance humanists preferred the types of writing they found in classical atin && history, speeches, letters, poetry, biography, and autobiography. That these were the forms in which the 8ible was [11] written only served to enhance their attractiveness to the humanists from the early fourteenth century onward. 8ehind this chronology and these definitions of the 1enaissance in Italy lie assumptions about fourteenth& and fifteenth&century cultural history that would have been unthin)able to 8urc)hardt and his contemporaries and are still foreign to students of 5panish history. Jispanists continue to wor) along the lines laid out by the great interpreters of 5panish intellectual history && #arcelino #enBnde" 6elayo, 1am!n #enBnde" 6idal, #arcel 8ataillon, and .mBrico ,astro && without (uestioning their premises. These interpreters consistently assume that fifteenth&century 5panish ,hristianity was monolithic and that any diversity of belief, even into the si/teenth century, was the product of borrowing from or reacting to other cultures && themselves monolithic. 5panish scholars have defined this unified fifteenth&century ,atholicism in terms of the late nineteenth century as the narrow, Thomistic, and almost puritanical ,atholicism in which they themselves were raised. Instead of regarding the 2heterodo/ies2 of the fifteenth century as a new norm common to all of 3urope, these Jispanic scholars see such diversities as departures from an objective 2,atholic2 norm fi/ed in the thirteenth century and attribute them to the influence of Audaism, Islam, 3rasmianism, or utheranism. 5uch an anachronistic approach to ,atholicism is not new && one need only read a few paragraphs of udwig von 6astor0s History of the Popes to see how the mentality of Katican I pervaded nineteenth& century historical interpretations of the church. 8ut 1enaissance and 1eformation scholars, both 6rotestant and ,atholic, for both Italy and transalpine 3urope have long abandoned such anachronism.
(1;)

It is time to do the same for 5pain, to loo) anew at the Iberian e/perience without the cloudy cataracts of time&honored interpretation, and to employ the assumptions of modern 1enaissance scholarshipF that there is && and was && no objective definition of ,atholicism, that the diversity of the fifteenth century was a new norm rather than a falling away from a pure state, and that this diversity was common not only to all of Eestern 3urope but also to the two 2oriental2 cultures resident in 5pain at the time. 4either Audaism nor Islam was ever monolithic, certainly not in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries+ yet Jispanists still treat them as coherent, even immutable, bodies of thought in which the ,astilians encountered ideas foreign to Eestern civili"ation. 8ut cultural e/change usually operates in a different way, and .rabic scholars now believe that the Eest either reborrowed what the Islamic world originally derived or adapted from the Eest anyway or too) over what was [12] compatible with Eestern culture, particularly in the 2neutral sphere2 of technological advance.(%>) in)ed to these general assumptions about 5pain0s participation in 3urope&wide phenomena in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries are a separate series of assumptions about ,astilian intellectuals and intellectual life that also merit reconsideration. Eere fourteenth& and fifteenth&century ,astilian authors the passive recipients of literary devices and attitudes they used without self&consciousness or discretionL iterary style is generally purposiveF the ,astilian humanists were as aware of what they were doing as the Italians and chose and shaped their structures, whether traditional or innovative, to

achieve specific effects.(%1) Thus the prose authors of early TrastCmara ,astile were aware of the literary and political implications of imitating the classics+ and their 1enaissance wor)s need to be labeled as such. The debate over arms versus letters in fifteenth&century ,astile, moreover, does not necessarily reflect a conflict between military and literary values. The conclusion of modern Jispanists(%%) && that ,astilians rejected 1enaissance intellectual values because these had been rejected by the hidalgos, the leaders of ,astilian society, who felt a conflict between their profession of arms and the 1enaissance value of letters && ignores the participation of two (uite different professional groups, the caballeros and the letrados, in the controversy. 8oth of these groups were hidalgos, but close study reveals that the caballeros defended the compatibility of arms and letters, while the letrados argued that letters were not appropriate to the military profession and should be left to those most fluent in atin && that is, to them. The caballeros supported their position by their actionsF the overwhelming majority of poets, historians, bibliophiles, and translators of the classics in fifteenth&century ,astile were caballeros. This conjunction of the military profession with literary productivity, furthermore, had been characteristic of ,astilian society for several centuries, yet arms versus letters was not one of the traditional debates (such as water versus wine or age versus youth) of medieval ,astilian literature.(%=) 4or does the controversy appear until the 1$%>s, after don .lfonso de ,artagena had made the first translations of ,icero into ,astilian. Ion .lfonso was in fact the most fre(uent participant in the debate and the principal spo)esman for incompatibility of arms and letters. .nd both the timing and the person suggest that in ,astile the topic was regarded as a classical topos, not only a manifestation of the bitter professional rivalry between caballeros and letrados but also a rather naive attempt to show that both groups )new their ,icero. If we approach 5panish intellectual history with these assumptions of [1 ] modern 1enaissance scholarship, it is possible to place the #endo"a in their own historical conte/t. 8y focusing on a single e/tended family, moreover, we can sufficiently limit the study to provide a depth of analysis and richness of te/ture while still permitting breadth of perspective and e/amination of the fundamental problems the 1enaissance historian must somehow place in their social milieu. To use family history as an approach to the 1enaissance in 5pain && to propose that a single e/tended family neither royal nor converso could produce a 1enaissance && is a radical departure from the traditional approach to 5panish intellectual history. 8ut the abundant material for the #endo"a permits the historian to study them and, through them, the sociocultural history of 1enaissance ,astile. It will be obvious that this study, while it may answer some (uestions about 5pain, raises many (uestions about the Italian 1enaissance. The fact that the ,astilian 1enaissance can be described in terms of a family tradition and that this tradition can clearly be attributed to the social and political circumstances of agrarian and monarchical ,astile in the late fourteenth century && without reference to Italy && should, I thin), raise some serious (uestions about what we have recently regarded as the necessary relationship between urban republicanism and the 1enaissance in Italy. The history of the #endo"a family suggests that a 1enaissance may develop under conditions different from those found in Italy and that the appearance of 1enaissance attitudes in the rest of 3urope may not necessarily result from a diffusion of the Italian 1enaissance. The ,astilian chancellor .yala, for e/ample, was writing history of a 1enaissance form and substance in 1=;'. 8oth this early date and .yala0s ignorance of things -lorentine suggest that the origins of the 1enaissance in ,astile were contemporaneous with and independent of the Italian 1enaissance. The subse(uent history of the ,astilian 1enaissance offers suggestive parallels with that of -lorence. -rom 1=;' until about 1$?>, a small group of the most politically active and intellectually prestigious men in ,astile wrote innovative 1enaissance wor)s under the influence of their ancestor, .yala. .fter

1$?>, a group of writers more dependent upon the state than its partners became the intellectual leaders of the )ingdom+ and their wor) mar)s an important shift to a type of professional humanism. Iuring the si/teenth century, several of .yala0s descendants revived his attitudes+ but their political careers were failures and they were unable to e/ercise intellectual leadership. ,hronologically, the ,astilian 1enaissance seems to have followed much the same course as the -lorentine, at about the same time. [1!] To those who believe that the -lorentine 1enaissance was the product of a particular political situation, it has seemed that the -lorentines wrote in the heat of the political crises that inspired them. In contrast, .yala wrote thirty years after the events that inspired him+ but .yala0s political milieu seems to meet one of 8urc)hardt0s re(uirements for the development of the 1enaissance in the Italian city&statesF he served an illegitimate government. .yala wrote to justify his adherence to a monarchy, but none of the arguments developed by the medieval scholastics could be used to support .yala0s )ing, for 3nri(ue II was illegitimate in every sense of the word. 8arred by this fact from using the traditional moral, theological, and theoretical arguments, .yala had to ma)e a complete brea) with traditional ,astilian historiography. Instead of ta)ing his model from the medieval historians and theorists, he turned to the ancient 1omans and to rhetoric. Thus .yala, writing in defense of a monarchy, arrived at the same political and rhetorical models as 5alutati, writing in defense of a republic. -or historians of the -lorentine 1enaissance, the fifteenth&century histories written as political propaganda have been among the most fruitful sources for the study of changing styles and attitudes. The fifteenth century had no parallel in 5pain in the production of propagandistic chronicles, for it was an age of so much innovation, intellectual as well as political, that it was difficult for the participants in political affairs to depend on traditional theoretical or moral e/planations of their behavior. In this situation, political events spawned political propaganda, each side trying to justify its behavior to both contemporaries and future generations. The sheer number of ,astilian chronicles from the fifteenth century is impressive, but e(ually impressive is their variety && the styles and contents range from confused patchwor)s of earlier political chronicles mi/ed with rudimentary morali"ing, through imitations of -roissart0s courtly ideali"ations of war, to histories designed as political propaganda utili"ing subtle rhetorical and classical devices to manipulate the reader0s feelings. The chronicles of this latter type, with their full&fledged sense of historical perspective, their secularism and relativism, were written in an emotional atmosphere for a ,astilian audience constantly bombarded with competing tracts and chronicles. 8y embedding speeches and letters into these histories, the fifteenth& century chroniclers left us a record of their most valued intellectual accomplishment && their rhetorical abilities && just as the -lorentine city council minutes have provided us with a record of changing rhetorical values in the shifting political climate of that city. [1"] .nother aspect of 1enaissance politics that has seemed to distinguish the Italian city&republics from monarchies was the opportunity for their citi"ens to participate in government directly and thus develop rhetorical s)ills. It is nevertheless possible that the differences between the -lorentine and ,astilian forms of government did not produce different attitudes toward rhetoric. The TrastCmara monarchy was neither a monolithic nor a hierarchical organi"ation that could ma)e decisions (uic)ly or without considering different points of view. 3nri(ue II was able to ta)e and )eep the throne because be had the support of the most powerful military lords of ,astile during the civil war and because he afterwards shared political, financial, and judicial power with his supporters. The TrastCmara monarchy began as a revolutionary government with a regicidal )ing who ruled with the consent of powerful interest groups, many of whom were as powerful as he. 8ecause conflicting groups had e(ually valid claims on the favors of the throne, decisions were reached only after e/tensive discussion+ and in this situation, rhetorical s)ills were as highly valued by the citi"ens of the ,astilian monarchy as they were by the citi"ens of the Italian republics.

The give&and&ta)e of debates in the assemblies of the city&republics apparently provided the forum where rhetorical s)ills were developed. In ,astile, this forum was the )ing0s councilF to be an active citi"en in the TrastCmara monarchy, one had to be a counsellor to the )ing && 2del consejo del rey2 && and this right to spea) directly to the )ing distinguished the ricoshombres or aristocracy from other wealthy citi"ens in the early TrastCmara period. Iuring the reign of -ernando and Isabel, when the )ing0s council was filled by letrados, intellectual leadership shifted to these new counsellors. Throughout the ,astilian 1enaissance, the intellectual leadership of the )ingdom was held by men privileged to debate before the )ing, who attempted to influence royal policy through their rhetorical s)ills. 9ne of the greatest differences between the 1enaissance in ,astile and that in -lorence lies in the contrast between the social bac)grounds of the authors of the two movements. .lthough the 1enaissance attitudes we associate with men of 2middle class2 bac)ground in -lorence were developed in ,astile by aristocrats, in some ways the aristocratic authors of early TrastCmara ,astile did not fit our usual notions of the nobility. They were newly arrived in a society of great social mobility and wanted to enhance their status through marriage, titles, and political positions+ they were obsessed with ac(uiring and increasing wealth+ they organi"ed themselves around the e/tended family for social, political, and educational [1#] purposes+ and they were proud of being as adept in letters as they were in arms. Their values, aspirations, and preoccupations were not as different from those of the -lorentine humanists as we might e/pect. 6erhaps the most interesting aspect of the ,astilian 1enaissance is its clear lin) with the papal court in .vignon. .lthough .yala and his descendants were responding to political conflicts within ,astile and addressing a ,astilian audience, they drew heavily and s)illfully upon the resources collected at .vignon during the fourteenth century. .nd the fact that both 6etrarch and .yala were educated at the papal court in .vignon may open some new avenues of speculation for those historians who believe that the classical erudition of the -lorentine humanists may have had its roots in .vignon. 1enaissance ,astile indicates how much historians of the Italian 1enaissance have missed by ignoring the wor)s of the Italian humanists0 contemporaries. 8y leaving the analysis of these non&Italian wor)s in the hands of scholars not trained in the 1enaissance, we have allowed the many similarities between Italian and non&Italian intellectual history to go unnoticed. Ehile 1enaissance scholars continue to display ever more precisely the brilliant accomplishments of Italy, the ,astilian accomplishment has been increasingly portrayed as obscurantist, anti&intellectual, and insular. Met even this brief e/amination of the attitudes of the #endo"a family indicates that the ,astilian 1enaissance and the -lorentine 1enaissance are stri)ingly parallel in their chronology, values, and techni(ues, an observation which suggests that the two societies were more similar than historians have commonly assumed. The more we have been assured that agrarian, monarchical, rural ,astile did not produce an indigenous 1enaissance, the more we have been convinced that the mercantile, republican, urban milieu of the northern Italian city&states was a necessary condition for the development of the 1enaissance. If, as I propose here, military aristocrats writing in defense of an illegitimate monarchy and drawing upon the intellectual resources of the papal court at .vignon formulated a 1enaissance of their own, then the political, social, and cultural similarities between ,astile and -lorence assume much greater significance. It is not necessary to argue that the ,astilian 1enaissance achieved the greatness of the -lorentine 1enaissance to suggest that ,astilian historical prose of the fifteenth century has been seriously underrated as 1enaissance literatureF fifteenth&century ,astilian prose is worthy of study both as humanist literature in itself and because of its implications for our understanding of the 1enaissance as a 3uropean&wide phenomenon.

4otes for the Introduction 1. 4o tengo de hacer cosa (ue perjudi(ue a my lealtad y a lo (ue soy obligado ny (ue sea ajena de lo (ue hi"ieron mys pasados.2 ,opiador, Tendilla to the mar(uesa de 6riego, G$ Auly 1'>?H. %. 2*eneral of the )ingdom of *ranada, captain and first praefect of the acropolis of Ill:beris.2 Jis ,astilian title was 2capitCn general del reyno de *ranada y alcaide del .lhambra.2 The inscription is on the tomb of Tendilla0s brother, Iiego Jurtado de #endo"a, archbishop of 5eville (d. 1'>%). =. 3l:as Tormo, 23l brote del renacimiento en los monumentos espaoles y los #endo"as del siglo NK,2 Boletn de la Sociedad Espaola de Excursiones, %' (1;1<), '1&?', 11$&1%1+ %? (1;1@), 11?&1=>. $. E.J. 6rescott, History of the Rei n of Ferdinand and Isa!ella the Catholic" of Spain, 1=th ed., 8oston, 1@'<, II, 1<'&1<@. '. AosB ,epeda .dCn, 2.ndaluc:a en 1'>@F un aspecto de la correspondencia del virrey Tendilla,2 Hispania, #adrid, %% (1;?%), =@&@>+ idem, 23l *ran Tendilla, medieval y renacentista,2 Cuadernos de Historia, 1 (1;?<), 1';&1?@. ?. Eilliam A. 3ntwistle, 25panish iterature to 1?@1,2 in Spain# $ Companion to Spanish Studies, ed. 3. .. 6eers, 'th ed., ondon, 1;'?, p. 11=. <. 8enjamin Oeen, Introduction to %he Spain of Ferdinand and Isa!ella" by A. J. #ariBjol, 4ew 8runswic), 4.A. G1;?1H, p. v. @. A.J. 3lliott, Imperial Spain &'()*&+&,, 4ew Mor), 1;?<, pp. 1%?, %'?&%'<. ;. 9n 6ietro #artire in 5pain, see A. J. #ariBjol, -n Lettr. italien a la cour d/Espa ne" &'00*&,1(2 Pierre 3artyr d/$n hiera" sa 4ie et ses oeu4res, 6aris, 1@@<+ .ntonio #ar:n 9cete, 06edro #Crtir de .ngler:a y su 9pus 3pistolarum,2 Boletn de la -ni4ersidad de 5ranada, <= (1;$=), 1?'&%'<. 9n the lac) of evidence for his influence, see .ngel *on"Cle" 6alencia and 3ugenio #ele, 6ida y o!ras de don 7ie o Hurtado de 3endo8a, #adrid, 1;$1&1;$=, I, '=. 1>. 9n ucio #arineo 5:culo in 5pain, see ,aro ynn, $ Colle e Professor of the Renaissance9 Lucio 3arineo Siculo amon the Spanish Humanists, ,hicago, 1;=<. -or his use of a 5panish model and 5paniards0 preference for the vernacular version, see 1obert 8. Tate, 2. Jumanistic 8iography of Aohn II of .ragon, a note,2 in Homena:e a ;aime 6icens 6i4es, 8arcelona, 1;?', I, ??'&?<=. 11. -rancesco *uicciardini, La Le a8ione di Spa na, in <pere medite, -lorence, 1@'<&1@??, vol. ?. 1%. Tarsicio de ."cona, La elecci=n y reforma del episcopado espaol en tiempo de los Reyes Cat=licos, #adrid, 1;?>, p. 1$<. 1=. 3ntwistle, 25panish iterature,2 p. 11@, in 6eers, Spain, discussing wor)s which he dates c. 1$$> and 1$?=. 1$. 23n tal sentido debe considerarse como ejemplar:simo anticipo de esta acci!n cultural y religiosa el documento (ue fue impreso en 1$<% y (ue ahora conmemoramos.2 ,arlos 1omero de ecea, El 6 centenario de la introducci=n de la imprenta en Espaa" Se o4ia" &'+1" antecedentes de la imprenta y circunstancias >ue fa4orecieron su introducci=n en Espaa, #adrid, 1;<%, p. 1?=. 1'. 2Eith the poets of -erdinand and Isabel0s reign, the #iddle .ges may be said to come to an end as concerns lyric poetry. Auan 8oscCn and *arcilaso of the si/teenth century will usher in the 1enaissance.2 1ichard 3. ,handler and Oessel 5chwart", $ ?e@ History of Spanish Literature, 8aton 1ouge, 1;?1, p. %@=.

1?. .. I. Ieyermond enhances the impression that the 1enaissance did not start until after the reign of -ernando and Isabel by removing the playwright, Auan del 3ncina, from consideration in his survey of fifteenth&century literatureF 2.t the end of the #iddle .ges, an arbitrary line has to be drawnF the plays of Auan del 3ncina and ucas -ernCnde", the printed version of $mads de 5aula, and the prose&wor)s of the early humanists belong both to medieval and to *olden .ge literature, and to avoid repetition they are treated not here but in the ne/t volumes.2 $ Literary History of Spain# %he 3iddle $ es, 4ew Mor), 1;<1, p. /v. 1<. 1.1. 8olgar, %he Classical Herita e, 4ew Mor), 1;?$, p. =1?+ ewis E. 5pit", %he Renaissance and Reformation 3o4ements, ,hicago, 1;<1, I, %@@&%@;+ #ariBjol, Spain of Ferdinand and Isa!ella, pp. =11&=1%. 9ne student of 5panish literature has gone so far as to conclude that 2in the si/teenth and seventeenth centuries 5pain was too isolated from the rest of the world to feel the 1enaissance deeply. Jer history was therefore a continuation, in an e/panded form, of the #iddle .ges.2 *erald 8renan, %he Spanish La!yrinth, ,ambridge, 1;<1, p. %%'. 1@. Jans 8aron, Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance, 6rinceton, 1;??. 5ee also idem, From Petrarch to Leonardo Bruni, ,hicago, 1;?@+ ,harles Trin)aus, In <ur Ima e and LiAeness" Humanity and 7i4inity in Italian Humanist %hou ht, % vols., ondon, 1;<>+ Eilliam A. 8ouwsma, 6enice and the 7efense of Repu!lican Li!erty, 8er)eley, 1;?@+ #arvin 8ec)er, 2lndividuahsm in the 3arly Italian 1enaissanceF 8urden and 8lessing,2 Studies in the Renaissance, 1; (1;<%), %<=&%;<+ 6eter 8ur)e, %he Renaissance Sense of the Past, 4ew Mor), 1;<>+ -eli/ *ilbert, 3achia4elli and 5uicciardini, 6rinceton, 1;?'+ ouis *reen, Chronicle into History, ,ambridge, 1;<%, Ionald 1. Oelley, Foundations of 3odern Historical Scholarship# Lan ua e" La@ and History in the French Renaissance, 4ew Mor), 1;<>+ 4ancy 5truever, %he Lan ua e of History in the Renaissance, 6rinceton, 1;<>+ 8. . 7llman, %he Humanism of Coluccio Salutati, 6adua, 1;?=. 1;. The diversity of ,atholic traditions in 5panish literature has recently been e/haustively described by 9tis J. *reen, Spain and the Bestern %radition, $ vols., #adison, Eis., 1;?=&1;??. The pioneer wor) in describing the diversity of fifteenth&century ,atholicism was ucien -ebvre, 27ne (uestion mal posBe,2 $u coeur reli ieux du &(e siCcle, 6aris, 1;'<. . modern account of the diversity of ,atholic traditions in the fifteenth century by an official papal historian is Jubert Aedin, $ History of the Council of %rent, trans. 3rnest *raf, vol. 1, ondon, 1;'<. udwig von 6astor0s views on this subject can best be seen in History of the Popes, vols. I&IK, trans. -. I. .ntrobus, et al. %nd ed., 5t. ouis #o., 1;>1&1;>%. %>. J...1. *ibb, 2The Influence of Islamic ,ulture on #edieval 3urope,2 Bulletin of the ;ohn Rylands Li!rary, =@ (1;''&1;'?), p. ;@. The diversity of fourteenth&century Audaism has been suggested by Aoel J. Olausner, 2Jistoric and 5ocial #ilieu of 5antob0s 6roverbios #orales,2 Hispania, $@, 4ew Mor), 1;?'+ and, for the fifteenth century, .lbert .. 5icroff, Les contro4erses des statuts de Dpuret. de san D en espa ne du E6e au E6IIe siCcle" 6aris, 1;?>. . similar diversity in fourteenth&century Islam and the crises which engendered it are described by #uhsin #ahdi, I!n Fhaldun/s Philosophy of History, ,hicago, 1;?$. %1. I )now of only two wor)s which treat 5panish literature of the period in this wayF .nthony 4. Pahareas, %he $rt of ;uan Rui8" $rchpriest of Hita, #adrid, 1;?'+ and uis 8eltrCn, Ra8ones de !uen amor# <posiciones y con4er encias en el li!ro del $rcipreste de Hita, #adrid, 1;<<. %%. 4icholas *. 1ound, 21enaissance ,ulture and its 9pponents in 1'th ,entury ,astile,2 3odern Lan ua e Re4ie@, '< (1;?%), %>$&%1'+ 6eter 3. 1ussell, 2.rms versus etters,2 $spects of the Renaissance, ed. .rchibald 1. ewis, .ustin, 1;?<+ AosB .ntonio #aravall, El humanismo de las armas en 7on Gui:ote, G#adridH 1;$@.

%=. This combination of arms and letters is such a stri)ing and important aspect of lyric poetry in fifteenth&century ,astile that one of .merica0s most eminent hispanists, 9tis J. *reen, has coined the term 2warrior poet2 to describe *arcilaso de la Kega and the long line of literary )nights from whom he was descended, beginning with -ernCn 6Bre" de .yala and including *arcilaso0s great. great& grandfather, -ernCn 6Bre" de *u"mCn. Spain and the Bestern %radition" I, 1%@.