[96] There has been some confusion about the time of the first appearance of these two second parts; one having sometimes been mistaken for the other. But Fuster evidently believed in no edition of the spurious second part older than 1603, the license to which is dated in 1602; and I possess the edition of the genuine second part, printed at Valencia in 1605, with a license of the same year, recognizing no earlier publication, and bearing all the usual proofs of being the first. Both of the second parts promise a third, which never appeared.
[97] Parte II. Lib. I. c. 8.
[98] The common bibliographers give lists of all the translations. The first English is by Mabbe, and is excellent. (See Wood’s Athenæ, ed. Bliss, Tom. III. p. 54, and Ret. Review, Tom. V. p. 189.) It went through at least four editions, the fourth being printed at London, 1656, folio; besides which there has been a subsequent translation by several hands, taken, however, I think, from the French of Le Sage. The Latin translation was by Gaspar Ens, and I have seen editions of it referred to as of 1623, 1624, and 1652. Every thing, indeed, shows that the popular success of the Guzman was immense throughout Europe.
[99] See the verses prefixed to the translation of Mabbe, and signed by Ben Jonson.
[100] There are four French translations of it, beginning with one by Chappuis, in 1600, and coming down to that of Le Sage, 1732, which last has been many times reprinted. The third in the order of dates was made by Bremont, while in prison in Holland; and, out of spite against the administration of justice, from which he was suffering, he made bitter additions to the original whenever a judge or a bailiff came into his hands. See the Preface of Le Sage.
[101] Parte I. Lib. I. c. 8. It is related by Guzman, however, who is much too young to tell such a story. It may be noted, also, that Guzman grows very suddenly to man’s estate, after leaving Madrid and before reaching Toledo, whither he went as fast as he could to escape pursuit.
[102] Beaumont and Fletcher, ed. Weber, Edinburgh, 1812, 8vo, Vol. V. p. 120. Le Sage omits it in his version, because, he says, Scarron had made it one in his collection of tales. It has, in fact, been often used, as have many other stories of the same class.
[103] The first edition of the “Pícara Justina” is that of Medina del Campo, 1605, 4to, since which time it has been often printed; the best edition being probably that of Madrid, 1735, 4to, edited by Mayans y Siscar, who, in a prefatory notice, makes the reproach against its author, as the oldest corrupter of the Spanish prose style, alluded to in the text. There is a good deal of poetry scattered through the volume; all very conceited and poor. Some of it is in that sort of verses from which the final syllable is cut off,—such verses, I mean, as Cervantes has prefixed to the first part of Don Quixote; and as both that part and the “Pícara Justina” were originally published in the same year, 1605, some question has arisen with Pellicer and Clemencin, who is the inventor of these poor, truncated verses. Le jeu ne vaut pas la chandelle. But, as the first part of Don Quixote, according to the Tassa prefixed to it, was struck off as early as the 20th of December, 1604, though the full copyright was not granted till the 9th of February following, there can be little doubt that Cervantes was the earliest.
[104] See the “Cancion á su Patria,” which is creditable alike to his personal feelings and—with the exception of a few foolish conceits—to his poetical character. Diversas Rimas de V. Espinel, Madrid, 1591, 12mo, f. 23.
[105] Espinel’s own Prólogo to “Marcos de Obregon.”