FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77  
78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   >>   >|  
discover why French republicans dislike the institutions of a Saxon monarchy. To be sure, the advantage is on the side of the French academicians; for, instead of sending forth a mass of confused, contradictory, and ill-written reports, based upon imperfect evidence, and leading to no definite conclusion, the literary commission, as Llorente informs us, was silent altogether; whereupon Llorente attributing, not unnaturally, this preternatural silence on the part of the three French _savans_, to the impossibility of finding any thing to say, after the lapse of a year and a half publishes his arguments, and appeals to literary Europe as the judge "en dernier ressort" of this important controversy. Llorente, however, was too precipitate; for on the 8th of January 1822, M. de Neufchateau presented to the French Academy an answer to Llorente's observations, on which we shall presently remark. It is maintained by the ingenious writer, Llorente--whose arguments, with such additions and remarks as have occurred to us upon the subject, we propose to lay before our readers, 1st, That Gil Blas and the Bachiller de Salamanca were originally one and the same romance. 2dly, That the author of this romance was at any rate a Spaniard. 3dly, That his name was Don Antonio de Solis y Ribadeneira, author of _Historia de la Conquista de Mejico_. 4thly, That Le Sage turned the single romance into two; repeating in both the same stories slightly modified, and mixing them up with other translations from Spanish novels. As the main argument turns upon the originality of Le Sage considered as the author of Gil Blas, we shall first dispose in a very few words of the third proposition; and for this purpose we must beg our readers to take for granted, during a few moments, that Gil Blas was the work of a Spaniard, and to enquire, supposing that truth sufficiently established, who that Spaniard was. Llorente enumerates thirty-six eminent writers who flourished in 1655, the period when, as we shall presently see, the romance in question was written. Of these Don Louis de Guevarra, author of the Diablo Cojuelo, Francisco de Santos, Jose Pellicer, and Solis, are among the most distinguished. Llorente, however, puts all aside--and all, except Pellicer perhaps, for very sufficient reasons--determining that Solis alone united all the attributes and circumstances belonging to the writer of Gil Blas. The writer of Gil Blas was a Castilian--t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77  
78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Llorente

 

French

 

romance

 
author
 
Spaniard
 

writer

 
arguments
 

Pellicer

 

presently

 

readers


literary
 

written

 

institutions

 

considered

 

dispose

 
argument
 

originality

 

proposition

 

granted

 
moments

dislike

 
novels
 

purpose

 

single

 

repeating

 

turned

 

Conquista

 
Mejico
 

monarchy

 

translations


mixing

 

stories

 

slightly

 

modified

 

Spanish

 

supposing

 

discover

 

distinguished

 

sufficient

 

belonging


Castilian

 

circumstances

 

attributes

 

reasons

 

determining

 

united

 
Santos
 

Francisco

 

thirty

 

eminent