Lazarillo de Tormes: Biography. Anonymous

is a classic. In at least two instances the Dictionary of the Spanish Academy refers to Lazarillo de Tormes as an authority for the meaning of words.

      English Translations

      Lazarillo de Tormes was first translated into English by David Rowlands of Anglesey. He called it The Pleasant History of Lazarillo de Tormes drawn out of Spanish. It was published by Abel Jeffes in the Fore Street without Grepell-gate near Groube Street at the sign of the Bell, and dedicated to Sir Thomas Gresham. It contains the Prologue, and a short chapter at the end about Lazaro’s continued prosperity, which is not in the first edition of 1554. This is the best translation. It was published in 1586.

      A new edition appeared in 1596, also published by Abel Jeffes, who had then removed to the Blacke Fryers near Puddle Wharfe. There were twenty editions or reprints, and Lazarillo was exceedingly popular with the Elizabethan reading public.

      James Blakiston brought out a new edition in 1653 dedicated to Lord Chandos. It consists of the translation by David Rowlands, omitting the Prologue, and of a translation of the spurious second part by Juan de Luna. Another edition appeared in 1669, another in 1677. The title is The Excellent History of Lazarillo de Tormes, the witty Spaniard.

      In 1726 there appeared The Life and Adventures of Lazarillo de Tormes, with twenty curious copper cuts. In 1727 the nineteenth edition was published. This version is a bad translation, omits the Prologue, and includes the spurious second parts.

      The worst performance of all was the edition of 1789 in two volumes. The type is better, but it is a very careless reprint of a bad translation. It omits the execrable illustrations of the earlier editions. Spanish names are scarcely recognisable. Gelves is called “the battle of Geleas!” for Escalona we have “Evealona.”

      All these translations are from late editions; none from the first edition.

      Notes on the Character of Lazaro

       Table of Contents

      The conception of the author, Don Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, was first to portray a boy, with everything against him, rising from the lowest rank of society to a prosperous condition, and to give a humorous account of his adventures; and secondly, to satirise certain types of men, the products of the age in which he wrote, through the medium of his boy hero.

      The author himself was a boy at the time, or at least a very young man, a student at Salamanca. He had no model, and the conception was quite original. He makes Lazarillo de Tormes a boy of his own age. The author made

       Lazaro’s age

       coincide with

       his own. Don Diego was born in 1503. Assuming Lazarillo to have been born in 1503,6 he was about 10 years old when he took service with the blind man, three years with his first three masters, and 14 years old when he took service with the seller of Indulgences. He carried on the business of water-carrier from the ages of 15 to 19, and was 20 when he married. That would bring him to 1523. The next year, when the Cortes met at Toledo, is made to be the year when Lazarillo de Tormes wrote the story of his life. Doubtless it was the year when Don Diego really completed his little romance, also aged 21.

      In conceiving the character of Lazaro it is likely that the young student had in his mind what he himself might have been, if he had been born in the same obscurity. The author’s

       conception of

       the two destinies. “The two destinies”7 were framed out of a noble and an ignoble birth, success in the latter case being far more meritorious than in the former. We find this reflection in the last sentence of the Prologue, where Don Diego points out how much more those have done who, not being favoured by noble birth, have, nevertheless, by cleverness and force of character, arrived at a good estate. If this idea of a boy such as the author, but without his noble birth and other advantages, was in Don Diego’s mind, we should expect to find Lazaro portrayed as a boy of a naturally good disposition and fine instincts, whose badp. xxxiii] qualities were due to his lowly birth and vicious surroundings. It is just such a boy as this that Don Diego presents to us.

      Nothing could be worse than poor Lazaro’s home. His mother was a widow who had intimacies with a groom of Moorish blood, had a child by him, and lived on the proceeds of his thieving, while Lazaro was employed to dispose of the stolen goods. Lazaro’s baneful

       surroundings as a

       child. His mother

       not unfeeling. When they were found out, the widow’s position became most precarious. Just then the wonderfully clever and plausible blind man appeared on the scene. He offered what, in comparison with the boy’s lot with his mother, seemed to be a decent provision. She is accused of unfeeling conduct in thus parting with her son. I do not think this is intended. The poor woman did what she thought was best for the child, and their parting was sorrowful and affectionate. Don Diego made her a thief and worse, but not a mother without feeling.

      The account of the professional cleverness and knowledge of the blind man is very interesting, but, in spite of it all, the little boy seems to have held his own to some extent with the old rascal. Capital stories

       most amusingly

       told. The trick with the half blancas, the story of the wine, and of the bunch of grapes, are capitally told and very amusing. It is true that the old man was handicapped by his blindness, though his strength, cleverness, and experience made up for it. He treated Lazaro abominably, but it must be acknowledged that, great as the provocation was, the boy’s revenge was cruel and unfeeling. He was sorry afterwards, for he wrote that his understanding was blinded in that hour.

      The boy’s ingenious ways of getting at the provisions of his second master, who was starving him, are capitally and most amusingly told. But the funniest and most witty story in the book is the boy’s terror at the coffin he believed to be coming to the house, and the reason he thought so.

      With the first two masters it was an incessant fight against starvation. Lazaro’s resourceful ingenuity was conspicuous, and, under the circumstances, he had a perfect right to use all his wits against the wretches who ill-treated him. But there was no opportunity of bringing out his finer qualities.

      With the third master it was very different. He was a penniless esquire, starving himself, and so excessively proud that he thought only of concealing his poverty. Lazaro had to resort to begging, and so he kept his poor master, as well as himself, alive. Here Lazaro comes out in an excellent light. He Lazaro’s higher

       qualities shown

       in his intercourse

       with the esquire.was not only kind-hearted and generous, but he showed tact and a wish to avoid hurting the poor proud creature’s feelings. Don Diego thus shows his hero in the light of one of nature’s gentlemen. The esquire’s account of himself, and his views of honour and its obligations are interesting, as showing a type of character which was common in Spain in those days. It was more elaborately portrayed by Cervantes.

      Lazaro is made to tell the story of the seller of Indulgences, and a very amusing story it is, no doubt true to life. For it aroused the anger of the Inquisition, and was expurgated from future editions. But Lazaro merely appears as a narrator; and his character is not developed; though it is in the rapid sketch of his rise to prosperity. Development

       of Lazaro’s

       character. He was a lad who was liked. His girl-friends who were kind to him in adversity, as well as the archpriest and many others who were good friends when he rose to prosperity, showed that he was a favourite among those with whom he came in contact.

      His marriage brought him great advantages. Critics have called it disgraceful, because we are told that evil tongues suggested that the girl had been the archpriest’s mistress. But there is nothing in the narrative to justify the belief that the evil tongues did not lie. On the contrary, the conclusion is the other way, and the story ends with a defence of his wife by Lazaro himself.

      The work is the production