perplexing, and the situation is further complicated by the publication
of a deed in which Cervantes declares that he himself is the real owner
of this house-property, and that his daughter has merely a life-interest
in it. This claim may be regarded as a legal fiction; it cannot easily
be reconciled with Cervantes' statement towards the end of his life,
that he was dependent on the bounty of the count de Lemos and of
Bernardo de Sandoval, cardinal-archbishop of Toledo. In 1609 he joined
the newly founded confraternity of the Slaves of the Most Blessed
Sacrament; in 1610 Lemos was appointed viceroy of Naples, and Cervantes
was keenly disappointed at not being chosen to accompany his patron. In
1611 he lost his sister Magdalena, who was buried by the charity of the
Tertiaries of Saint Francis; in 1612 he joined the Academia Selvaje, and
there appears to have renewed his former friendly relations with Lope de
Vega; in 1613 he dedicated his _Novelas exemplares_ to the count de
Lemos, and disposed of his rights for 1600 _reales_ and twenty-four
copies of the book. The twelve tales in this volume, some of them
written very much later than others, are of unequal merit, but they
contain some of the writer's best work, and the two picaresque
stories--_Rinconete y Cortadillo_ and the _Coloquio de los perros_--are
superb examples of their kind, and would alone entitle Cervantes to take
rank with the greatest masters of Spanish prose. In 1614 he published
the _Viage del Parnaso_, a burlesque poem suggested by the _Viaggio in
Parnaso_ (1582) of the Perugian poet Cesare Caporali. It contains some
interesting autobiographical passages, much flattery of contemporary
poetasters, and a few happy satirical touches; but, though it is
Cervantes' most serious bid for fame as a poet, it has seldom been
reprinted, and would probably have been forgotten but for an admirably
humorous postscript in prose which is worthy of the author at his best.
In the preface to his _Ocho comedias y ocho entremeses nuevos_ (1615) he
good-humouredly admits that his dramatic works found no favour with
managers, and, when this collection was first reprinted (1749), the
editor advanced the fantastic theory that the _comedias_ were deliberate
exercises in absurdity, intended to parody the popular dramas of the
day. This view cannot be maintained, but a sharp distinction must be
drawn between the eight set plays and the eight interludes; with one or
two exceptions, t