Article #437-2 | Gutenberg Articles

Excerpt

Excerpt from The Life of Lazarillo of Tormes: His Fortunes and Misfortunes as Told by Himself, by Anonymous

Because Lazarillo was so critical of the clergy, it was put on
the Index Purgatorius in 1559 and further editions were
prohibited inside Spain. Then, in 1573, an abridged version was
printed that omitted Chapters four and five, along with other
items displeasing to a watchful Inquisition; later additional
episodes were suppressed. This mutilated version was reprinted
until the nineteenth century, when Spain finally allowed its
people to read the complete work once again.

The identity of the author of this novel has always been a
mystery. A few names have been suggested over the years: Juan de
Ortega, a Jeronymite monk; Sebastian de Horozco, a dramatist and
collector of proverbs. But probably the most widely accepted
theory was the attribution to Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, a famous
humanist. Many early editions of Lazarillo carried his name as
author, even though there has never been any real proof of his
authorship. Some critics, following Americo Castro's lead, think
the author was a Jewish convert to Christianity because of
certain phrases which point in that direction. And some think he
was a follower of Erasmus, despite the French critic Marcel
Bataillon's emphatic statements to the contrary.

One of the first relationships we become aware of as we read this
novel is the link of the name Lazaro (Lazarillo: little Lazaro)
with the biblical Lazarus: either the figure who died and was
brought back to life (John 16) or the beggar (Luke 16:20-31).
This "historical" relationship is further compounded by the fact
that many episodes of the novel are versions of material
traditional in European folklore. There is, for instance, a
thirteenth century French theatrical farce, Le garcon et
l'aveugle, in which a servant plays tricks on a blind man. And
the British Museum manuscript of the Decretals of Gregory IX
contains an illustration of a boy drinking through a straw from a
blind man's bowl. The episode in which Lazarillo thinks a corpse
is being brought to his house appears in the Liber facetiarum et
similitudinum Ludovici de Pinedo, et amicorum and may be a
folktale. And the story of the constable and the pardoner is to
be found in the fourth novel of Il novellino by Masuccio
Salernitano, and may also be a folktale.

Explanation

Detailed Explanation of the Excerpt from The Life of Lazarillo of Tormes

This excerpt provides historical, literary, and thematic context for Lazarillo de Tormes (The Life of Lazarillo of Tormes: His Fortunes and Misfortunes as Told by Himself), a Spanish picaresque novel published anonymously in 1554. Below is a breakdown of the key elements in the passage, focusing on its significance, themes, and literary connections as presented in the text itself.

1. Censorship and the Inquisition’s Role

The excerpt begins by highlighting the suppression of Lazarillo due to its critique of the clergy:

The novel was placed on the Index Purgatorius (1559), a list of prohibited books by the Catholic Church, and later editions were banned in Spain.
In 1573, an abridged version was published, omitting Chapters 4 and 5 (which contain some of the sharpest satire against corrupt priests) and other "displeasing" content.
This mutilated version remained in circulation until the 19th century, when the full text was finally restored.

Significance:

The censorship reflects the political and religious climate of 16th-century Spain, where the Spanish Inquisition tightly controlled literature, especially works that criticized the Church.
The fact that Lazarillo was banned yet still circulated (in expurgated form) suggests its popularity and subversive power—it was too influential to be completely erased.
The restoration of the full text in the 19th century coincides with liberal reforms in Spain, indicating a shift in attitudes toward free expression.

2. The Mystery of Authorship

The excerpt discusses the unknown identity of the author, listing several theories:

Juan de Ortega (a Jeronymite monk)
Sebastián de Horozco (a dramatist and proverb collector)
Diego Hurtado de Mendoza (a humanist scholar, the most widely attributed author, though unproven)
A Jewish convert (converso)—suggested by Américo Castro due to certain linguistic and thematic clues.
A follower of Erasmus (though disputed by Marcel Bataillon).

Significance:

The anonymity of the author was likely intentional, possibly to avoid persecution (given the book’s anti-clerical themes).
The Erasmus connection is significant because Erasmus (a Dutch humanist) was known for his criticism of Church corruption, aligning with Lazarillo’s satirical tone.
The converso theory is intriguing because Jewish converts in Spain often faced suspicion, and their perspectives might have fueled the novel’s cynical view of religious hypocrisy.

3. Biblical and Folkloric Connections

The excerpt explores two major literary influences on Lazarillo:

A. The Name "Lázaro" and Biblical Lazarus

Lázaro (Lazarillo = "Little Lázaro") evokes two biblical figures:
1. Lazarus of Bethany (John 11–12) – A man raised from the dead by Jesus, symbolizing rebirth and survival (fitting for Lazarillo’s resilience).
2. The Beggar Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31) – A poor, suffering man who finds justice in the afterlife, contrasting with the rich man (Dives) who ignores him.
Thematic Link: Lazarillo, like the biblical Lazarus, is a marginalized figure who endures hardship, but unlike the biblical version, he does not receive divine justice—instead, he must rely on his wits in a corrupt world.

B. European Folklore and Earlier Literary Works

The excerpt lists several medieval and Renaissance sources that parallel episodes in Lazarillo:

French farce Le garçon et l’aveugle (The Boy and the Blind Man, 13th c.) – Features a servant tricking a blind man, much like Lazarillo’s first master, the blind beggar, whom he deceives to survive.
Illustration in Decretals of Gregory IX – Shows a boy drinking from a blind man’s bowl with a straw, mirroring Lazarillo’s clever theft of wine and food from his blind master.
Corpse Misidentification Tale – Found in Liber facetiarum (a collection of jokes by Ludovico de Pinedo), where a boy mistakes a corpse for a guest, similar to Lazarillo’s comical terror when he thinks a dead body is being brought into his house.
The Constable and the Pardoner – A story from Masuccio Salernitano’s Il Novellino (15th c.), which may have inspired Lazarillo’s later masters, including the corrupt pardoner (seller of indulgences).

Significance:

These connections show that Lazarillo draws from a long tradition of trickster tales, where clever underdogs outwit authority figures.
The folkloric elements make the story universally relatable, reinforcing its satirical and moral lessons.
The biblical allusions add depth to Lazarillo’s character, framing him as both a suffering everyman and a cunning survivor.

4. Themes Highlighted in the Excerpt

While the excerpt does not directly quote the novel, it implies several key themes:

Anti-Clerical Satire – The censorship and omission of chapters suggest that the novel mocked priests and religious hypocrisy, a dangerous act in Inquisition-era Spain.
Survival and Cunning – The folkloric tricks (stealing from the blind man, outsmarting masters) emphasize Lazarillo’s resourcefulness in a harsh world.
Social Critique – The biblical Lazarus comparison highlights injustice and poverty, while the folktale elements reinforce the universality of oppression and resistance.
Identity and Marginalization – The anonymous authorship and possible converso background reflect the persecution of outsiders (Jews, the poor, critics of the Church).

5. Literary Devices and Style

Though not explicitly stated, the excerpt hints at the novel’s use of:

Irony – The Church bans a book that exposes its own corruption.
Intertextuality – The borrowing from folklore and the Bible enriches the narrative with layers of meaning.
First-Person Narration – The title ("as told by himself") suggests Lazarillo’s unreliable yet compelling perspective, a hallmark of the picaresque genre.
Dark Humor – The comical episodes (drinking from the blind man’s bowl, mistaking a corpse for a guest) mask deeper social criticism.

6. Why This Excerpt Matters

This passage is crucial because it:

Explains the novel’s controversial reception (banned, censored, later restored).
Highlights its literary ancestry (folktales, biblical stories, earlier satires).
Suggests possible authorial motives (anti-clericalism, converso perspective, humanist influence).
Frames Lazarillo as a foundational work—both in the picaresque tradition and in Spanish literary history.

**Conclusion: Lazarillo as a Subversive Masterpiece**

The excerpt presents Lazarillo de Tormes as:

A bold critique of 16th-century Spanish society, particularly the corrupt clergy.
A clever blend of folklore, biblical allusion, and social realism.
A survivor’s tale, where the protagonist uses wit rather than morality to navigate a cruel world.
A mysterious work, whose anonymous author may have been a dissident, a converso, or a humanist—or all three.

By analyzing the text’s censorship, influences, and themes, we see why Lazarillo remains one of the most important and enduring works of Spanish literature—a scathing, humorous, and deeply human story of survival against the odds.

Questions

Question 1

The passage’s discussion of Lazarillo’s censorship and later restoration most strongly implies that the novel’s enduring significance lies in its capacity to:

A. transcend its historical moment by appealing to universal human experiences of marginalization.
B. serve as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked ecclesiastical power.
C. expose systemic hypocrisy in a manner so potent that even bowdlerized versions could not fully suppress its subversive core.
D. provide a template for later picaresque narratives by codifying the trickster archetype.
E. reflect the shifting ideological tides of Spanish society from the Counter-Reformation to the Enlightenment.

Question 2

The passage’s treatment of the authorship debate—particularly the mention of Americo Castro’s theory and Marcel Bataillon’s rebuttal—primarily serves to:

A. illustrate the futility of attributing anonymous works in the absence of definitive evidence.
B. highlight the ideological stakes of literary scholarship in post-Inquisition Spain.
C. suggest that the author’s identity is less important than the text’s thematic resonance.
D. underscore how the novel’s ambiguous origins mirror its protagonist’s precarious social position.
E. demonstrate the incompatibility of humanist and converso interpretations of the work.

Question 3

The juxtaposition of the biblical Lazarus figures (John 16 and Luke 16:20–31) with Lazarillo’s character most plausibly functions to:

A. create a paradox wherein the protagonist’s survival depends on rejecting the passive suffering associated with his namesake.
B. align the novel with Reformation theology by emphasizing salvation through individual agency rather than divine intervention.
C. critique the Catholic Church’s exploitation of biblical narratives to justify social inequality.
D. establish Lazarillo as a Christ-like figure whose trials redeem the sins of his oppressors.
E. contrast the spiritual poverty of the clergy with the moral purity of the downtrodden.

Question 4

The passage’s catalog of folkloric and literary precursors (e.g., Le garcon et l’aveugle, Il novellino) is structured to emphasize that Lazarillo’s originality lies not in its plot but in its:

A. psychological depth, which transforms archetypal tricks into a study of trauma.
B. political boldness, as it weaponizes common tropes against institutional authority.
C. formal innovation, particularly its use of first-person narration to undermine moral certitudes.
D. contextual specificity, whereby generic motifs acquire radical significance in Inquisition-era Spain.
E. intertextual density, which invites readers to decode hidden critiques through allusive layering.

Question 5

The passage’s closing sentence—“when Spain finally allowed its people to read the complete work once again”—is most effectively read as an example of:

A. ironic understatement, given the delayed and incomplete nature of the restoration.
B. nationalist triumphalism, framing the novel’s return as a victory for Spanish cultural heritage.
C. passive-voice construction that subtly indicts the state for its prolonged suppression of dissent.
D. historical determinism, implying that the novel’s reemergence was an inevitable consequence of progress.
E. nostalgic idealization, overlooking the persistent societal resistance to the text’s anti-clerical themes.

Solutions and Explanations

1) Correct answer: C

Why C is most correct: The passage emphasizes that Lazarillo’s critique of the clergy was so threatening that the Inquisition mutilated the text yet could not erase its subversive power—even the abridged version retained enough potency to require suppression. The phrase “mutilated version was reprinted until the nineteenth century” suggests that the core critique persisted despite censorship, aligning with C’s claim that the novel’s exposure of hypocrisy was inescapably radical.