![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
Around 1379, Pero López de Ayala began work on the Crónica del rey don Pedro y del rey don Enrique to legitimize Enrique II's right to the crown of Castile. Ayala's historical narrative was an important part of Enrique's political program that justified not only his rule but also that of his descendants. However, less than ten years after its completion Ayala significantly rewrote the chronicle, rearranging, eliminating, and adding material to his previous work. Given the work's centrality to Trastámara legitimacy, why would Ayala change his earlier version? In this article, I argue that Ayala rewrote the chronicle to adapt to the changing historical, political, and literary context in which he was writing. I contend that the differences between the earlier versión primitiva and the later versión vulgar reflect the differences between the political programs of Enrique II and his immediate descendants, Juan I and Enrique III, and constitute a response to contemporary interpretations of the recent past.
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge and thank the Fulbright Program and the Nanovic Institute for European Studies at the University of Notre Dame for their support, which was crucial in the research and writing of this article. I would also like to thank everyone who read and provided feedback on early versions of the work.
Notes
1In the later Crónica de Juan II, Álvar García de Santa María stated that Enrique II had asked a historian to write of the deeds that occurred leading up to and during his reign. Given the context, it is clear that this historian is Ayala, which makes 1379 the latest possible date for the beginning of the initial composition of the Crónica del rey don Pedro y del rey don Enrique (Orduna, Arte, 179).
2This period begins with the death of Alfonso XI in 1350 and covers the uncontested years of Pedro's rule (1350–66), the time of civil and fraternal strife (1366–69), and, finally, Enrique's consolidation of power in Castile (1369–79).
3Scholars formerly treated the Crónica del rey don Pedro and the Crónica del rey Enrique as discrete works, but recent scholarship has come to see Ayala's account of the reigns of Pedro I and Enrique II as a single text (Orduna, Arte, 180–85). Orduna uses the CPE as the title in his modern edition of the text, which is found in British Library MS Add 17906.
4In the dedication to his translation of Livy's Décadas (p. 220), Ayala asked that the work be read aloud to the king and his knights. Given that Alfonso X had conceived of a similar audience for history writing (Las Siete Partidas, Section II, Title XXI, Ch. 20), it seems probable that Ayala had imagined a comparable oral presentation and audience for the CPE.
5That there were two distinct versions of the chronicle was first noted in the second half of the sixteenth century by Jerónimo Zurita, a royal chronicler whose work became the basis of subsequent published versions of the text (Orduna, “Cotejo,” 2).
6I use the term versión primitiva to refer to the first redaction of the CPE. Many scholars, dating back to Zurita, have used the term versión abreviada to refer to this redaction. However, according to Orduna, the term abreviada more appropriately refers to those manuscripts that combine the primitiva with the later Crónica del rey don Juan and, occasionally, the Crónica del rey don Enrique III (López de Ayala, CPE, Intro. Orduna, li). Furthermore, using the term primitiva reinforces the fact that this version of the chronicle was written first (Orduna, “Cotejo,” 3).
7Valdaliso, Historiografía, 151.
8The versión vulgar refers to the second redaction of the CPE. It can also refer to those manuscripts that contain the second redaction of the CPE and the Crónica del rey don Juan (López de Ayala, CPE, Intro. Orduna, li).
9García, Obra y personalidad, 158–65.
10Orduna, “Cotejo,” 6.
11Valdeón, Trastámaras, 41.
12Valdeón, Trastámaras, 42.
13Russell, English Intervention, 175. The English parliament officially declared Lancaster and Constance to be king and queen of Castile. Lancaster subsequently established a type of court in exile at the Savoy, his palace in London, which became a focal point for Castilian exiles and the enemies of Enrique II.
14Suárez, Monarquía, 95.
15Nader, Mendoza Family, 19.
16Valdeón, Trastámaras, 26. Valdeón argues that Enrique began creating propaganda from the moment he invaded Castile in 1366 (Valdeón, “Propaganda,” 460).
17Estepa, “Rebelión,” 56. This depiction was supported by the rumors that Pedro I was actually Jewish. By presenting Pedro as a secret Jew, Enrique II took advantage of the strong anti-Semitic sentiment in medieval Castile. Moreover, these claims also reinforced Enrique's presentation of Pedro as an enemy of God.
18Valdaliso, Historiografía, 167.
19Aquel malo tirano que se llamaua Rey. Cortes de los antiguos reinos de León y de Castilla, II: 146. All translations from Spanish are mine.
20Fazemos vos saber que nos, sientiondonos del destruyemiento de los regnos e de las tierras que agora son en nuestro señorío, que aquel tiranno malo enemigo de Dios e de la su santa Madre Eglesia [Pedro I] fizo e fazia en ellos continuada miente, acreçentado siempre en maldat e en crueldat, destruyendo las eglesias … e desastrando los fiiosdalgo e desterrandolos e faziendolos pecheros, e despechando los cibdanos e los labradores de toda la tierra, e acreçentando e enrrequiçiendo los moros e los iudios e enseñorandolos e abaxando la fe catolica de nuestro Señor Jhesu Christo, oviemos de venir á sacar e librar estos regnos de tanta subjecçion e de tanto desafu[e]ro e de tanta catividat … porque Dios sea servido e la santa Eglesia e la su santa fe sea acreçentada. Cartulario del Infantado de Covarrubias, clxxxix.
21Desque entramos en el regno de Castiella rezibieronnos por rey e por señor luego todos los de Castiella e condes e ricos omes e otros capitanes. Cartulario del Infantado de Covarrubias, clxxxix.
22The arguments that Enrique chose not to use are also significant. Despite placing a great deal of importance on Pedro's opposition to God and the Church, Enrique never mentioned that Pedro had been excommunicated by the pope, nor does he relate the story that the pope had legitimized Enrique's own birth so that he could claim the crown (a version of this story appears in the work of Jean Froissart, whose relationship with Ayala will be discussed below). One possible explanation for these omissions is that Ayala did not want to base Enrique's legitimacy on external powers. In the versión primitiva, it is ultimately the people of Castile who justify Enrique's right to rule.
23One attribute of Enrique's program that Ayala did not include was the rumor that Pedro I was the illegitimate son of a Jew. In the CPE Pedro is presented as the son of Alfonso XI. He is unfit to rule due to his actions, not because of his birth.
24Ferro, “Intertexto,” 69–71.
25Versions of these letters also exist in the near-contemporary accounts of Froissart and Chandos Herald. Moreover, Delachenal discovered what he considered to be a contemporary transcription of a historical exchange of letters between Enrique II and the Prince of Wales in MS. Cotton Caligula D.III, no. 141 (Delachenal, Histoire, III: 555–56). For a detailed comparison of the letters embedded by Ayala and the historical documents, see Moure, “Correspondencia.”
26By assigning what is the clearest formulation of this dual argument – namely, that Pedro's immoral actions make him unfit for the crown, and that Enrique's rule is supported by the election of the people along with the will of God – to Enrique himself, Ayala gave the king agency in promoting this argument while also emphasizing these claims within the text.
27Don enrrique por la gracia de dios rrey de castilla e de leon al muy alto y poderoso don duarte primo genito del rrey de inglatierra y principe de gales … non nos paresce que vos auedeis seydo informado commo ese adversario nuestro en los tienpos passados que touo estos rreynnos los rregio … el mato en este rreynno la rreyna donna blanca de borbon que era su muger legitima e mato ala rreyna de aragon donna leonor que era su tia … e mato a tres hermanos suyos don fadrique maestre de santiago y don juan e don pedro … e tomo contra su voluntad muchas duennas e donzellas deste rreyno e dellas casadas e tomaba todos los derechos del papa y de los perlados por las quales cosas e otras muchas que seria luengo de contar dios por su merced dio sentencia contra el que el de su propria voluntad desamparo el rreynno e se fue. Folios 75r–75v. All citations from the versión primitiva are taken from MS BNE 2880, which was consulted in person as well as accessed on-line on 4 February 2015. As Moure has shown, MS BNE 2880 is the oldest extant manuscript of the versión primitiva, although he refers to it as the versión abreviada (Moure, “Sobre la cuestión,” 25). For the sake of clarity, I have silently expanded all textual abbreviations in these citations. However, I have not regularized spelling or punctuation.
28Ayala is specifically referencing Pedro I's abandonment of Burgos in 1366 following Enrique II's initial invasion of Castile (this connection is made explicit in the versión vulgar, which mentions Burgos by name). This moment is not only significant as an example of Pedro failing to protect his kingdom, but it is also an important personal moment for Ayala who, shortly after the events of Burgos, switched his support from Pedro to Enrique.
29Fue este fecho muy malo e muy feo matar al arzobispo de santiago que es vn santo patron e defensor de despanna dentro dela su yglesia do todos los del mundo vienen a onrrar e visytar. MS BNE 2880, folio 69v. Ayala revised his depiction of this event significantly in his later versión vulgar of the CPE. In fact, as will be discussed in more detail below, this is a key area where we can see how Ayala manipulated his narrative between the two versions of the CPE to achieve specific results.
30In the historical letter discovered by Delachenal, Enrique II does not mention that the Prince of Wales is the oldest son of Edward III. This suggests that Ayala interpolated this information for a specific purpose, which, in this case, was to emphasize the privileged position of Enrique.
31Todos los de los rreynnos de castilla e de leon … de su propria voluntad todos venyeron a nos e nos tomaron por su rrey e por su sennor asy perlados commo caualleros e fijos dalgo e cibdades e villas del rreynno lo qual non es de maravillar ca en tienpo de los godos que sennorearon las espannas e donde nos venymos asy lo fizieron e ellos tomaban e tomaron por rrey aqualquier que entendian que mejor los podia gouernar e se guardo por grandes tienpos esta custumbre despanna e avn oy dia en espanna es aquella custumbre que juran al primo genito del rrey en su vida … por tanto entendemos que por estas cosas sobre dichas que abemos derecho en este rreynno pues que voluntad de dios e de todos nos fue. MS BNE 2880, folio 75v.
32Not only did Ayala create a link between the political situation in contemporary Castile and an established historical tradition of election, but he also presented – in fact, in many ways he invented – an idealized image of the Visigothic past in which election was a viable means of establishing kingship. Moreover, his depiction of an elected monarch seems to suggest that anyone could become king.
33By 1367, both Pedro I and Enrique II had used the cortes to have their children sworn in as heirs to the crown. Pedro, in fact, did so twice. The first time was for his son Alfonso, who was named heir in 1362. Following the prince's untimely death later that year, Pedro had the cortes recognize his daughters in 1363, which subsequently became the basis for the Lancastrian claims to the crown.
34The versión primitiva constructed a negative image of Pedro as a tyrant who deserved to be killed by his half-brother. Nonetheless, Ayala's depiction of Pedro's death in the versión primitiva is somewhat ambivalent. One possible explanation for this is that Ayala was responding to, perhaps reacting against, an unknown version of this event. Menéndez y Pelayo even hypothesized that there must have been some sort of canción popular that presented a pro-Pedro version of his death, which has since either been lost or suppressed by Enrique II and his descendants (Antología, VII: 67).
35Luego que ally llego lo sopo el rrey don enrrique vino ally armado e entro enla posada de mosen beltran e asy commo llego e lo vio ferio lo con vna adaga por la cara e dizen que amos a dos cayeron en tierra e el rrey don enrrique lo ferio estando en tierra de otras feridas e ally murio el rrey don pedro e fue fecho luego gran rruydo por el rreal vna vez deziendo que era ydo el rrey don pedro del castillo de montiel e otra vez deziendo en commo era muerto e murio el rrey don pedro en hedat de treynta e seys annos. MS BNE 2880, folio 92v.
36Orduna, “Cotejo,” 2.
37One of the ways in which we can date the text is by its reference to the birth of Constanza, the daughter of Pedro I and María de Padilla. The text goes on to state that Constanza married the Duke of Lancaster and had a daughter, Catalina, of whom the text states that she “is now the wife of King Enrique” (Ayala, CPE, 1354, xiii). Since Enrique III did not become king until 1390, we know that Ayala must have been working on this text after that date. For more information regarding the dating of the versión vulgar, consult the introduction to Orduna's modern edition.
38Ayala was one of Juan's advisors, and he was taken prisoner following this defeat. According to different accounts, the author spent between five and thirty months imprisoned while he waited for his ransom to be collected and delivered, which means that he may not have been back in Castile until 1387 or even 1388.
39The term emperegilados began as an insult used by Enrique's supporters, which builds upon the rumor that Pedro I was the son of a Jewish physician named Pero Gil (Echevarría, Catalina de Lancaster, 16). In other contemporary works, the name Pero Gil was also used to refer Pedro himself.
40Echevarría, Catalina de Lancaster, 46.
41Catalina, along with her mother, was involved in the transfer of Pedro's remains and his burial in Seville. Catalina also devoted time and money to help the remaining descendants of Pedro I and try to end the division provoked by the civil war. For more information regarding the influence of Catalina de Lancaster during the reigns of Juan I, Enrique III, and Juan II see Echevarría, Catalina de Lancaster.
42Gimeno, Imagen, 186. Juana Manuel was the daughter of Blanca de la Cerda y Lara, the daughter of Fernando de la Cerda, the younger son of the infante Fernando de la Cerda, who was the oldest son of Alfonso X. The infante Fernando de la Cerda died during his father's lifetime, whereupon his younger brother, Sancho IV, forced Alfonso X to make him the heir, thus disinheriting the de la Cerda line.
43Russell, English Intervention, 420.
44 Cortes de los antiguos reinos de León y de Castilla, II: 350–59.
45In the Crónica del rey don Juan, which was composed in the 1390s either simultaneously with or shortly after the versión vulgar of the CPE, Ayala replicates Juan's claim regarding the illegitimacy of Sancho IV and his descendants in his depiction of an embassy sent by Juan I to John of Gaunt (Ayala, Crónica del rey don Juan, 1386, ix). However, immediately after Juan's ambassadors presented his case, Ayala relates how Juan de Castro, representing John of Gaunt, refutes his points relating to illegitimacy. That Ayala presented these arguments last is significant, as it allows the counter-argument the final word on these claims. Moreover, Ayala carefully omits any mention of Pedro I himself being illegitimate. Through these changes, we see that Ayala was aware of Juan's initial claims from 1386, but wrote in support of his post-1388 argument, which focused entirely on lineage, including that of Pedro I, who had been newly re-embedded as an ancestor of future Trastámara rulers.
46Non nos paresce que vos auedes seydo bien enformado commo esse nuestro adversario, en los tienpos que touo estos rregnos, los rrigio … E todos los de los rregnos de Castilla e de Leon, con muy grand trabajo e daño e peligros de muertes e de manzillas, sostouieron lo que el fizo fasta aqui e non las pudieron mas encobrir nin sofrir, las quales cosas serian luengas de contar: Dios por su merced … dio su sentençia contra el que el de su propia voluntad los desanparo e se fue. Ayala, CPE, 1367, xx. All citations from the versión vulgar are taken from Orduna's edition.
47While generally true for Pedro's crimes against the church and against women, this is not true for all of Pedro's misdeeds. In particular, some of Pedro's murders, such as that of Garci Laso, are described in more detail in the versión vulgar than in the versión primitiva.
48Catalina was queen of Castile between 1390 and 1406. Following the death of Enrique III, she became a regent and ruled Castile along with her brother-in-law, Fernando de Antequera, until 1418. During this period, she developed a friendship with Leonor López de Córdoba, who wrote what is considered to be a pro-Pedro account of the recent past. Given this friendship, her position at court, and her support of Pedro's descendants, it is reasonable to suggest that she had an influence on the way that Ayala would have presented her grandfather, Pedro I. Moreover, Catalina also had a personal connection to Ayala through his niece, Teresa de Ayala, who had been involved with Pedro I and had given him a daughter, María, By all accounts, Catalina and Teresa were close, and the queen even offered to provide her daughter with a dowry (Echevarría, Catalina de Lancaster, 77).
49Moure notes that the argument behind the election – that people had the right to choose the person who could best govern as king – would have become dangerous once the Trastámara were established as the ruling dynasty (Moure, “Correspondencia,” 96).
50The increased importance of lineage is reflected in Juan's address to the cortes in Segovia, discussed above, and it is also seen in the versión vulgar of the CPE itself through its interpolation of the story of King Rodrigo, the Count don Julián, and the fall of the Visigothic kingdom (interpolated in the text in the year 1351, xviii), and more directly through the inclusion of a royal genealogy in the proemio, which Orduna has argued was written at the same time as the versión vulgar (López de Ayala, CPE, Intro. Orduna, xlvi).
51Joäo I was the illegitimate son of Fernando I of Portugal. Following the latter's death, Juan I invaded the kingdom in support of his wife, Beatriz, the legitimate daughter of the king. According to Ayala in the Crónica del rey don Juan, Joäo led the Portuguese resistance and was elected king by the Portuguese cortes.
52Gimeno, Imagen, 184.
53García, Obra y personalidad, 137. Although he still mentions himself as a character in a few places (such as in 1359, as part of the fleet against Barcelona), Ayala generally diminished his role in the revised history. For instance, in the versión vulgar Ayala significantly downplays his role in forcing the Archbishop of Toledo from the city on Pedro's orders (Ayala, CPE, 1360, xxi).
54Señor, Yo Gutier Ferrandez de Toledo beso vuestras manos e me despido de la vuestra merçed … Señor, digo vos tanto al punto de la mi muerte, por que este sera el mi postrimero consejo, que sy vos non alçades el cuchillo e no escusades de facer tales muertes commo esta, que vos auedes perdido vuestro rregno, e tenedes vuestra persona en peligro. E pido vos por merçed que vos guardedes, ca lealmente fablo con vusco, ca en tal ora esto que non deuo dezir si non verdat. Ayala, CPE, 1360, xvii.
55Ayala, CPE, 1360, xix.
56Grand sabidor e grand filosofo e consegero del rrey de Granada. Ayala, CPE, 1367, xxii. Modern scholars have identified Ayala's Benahatin as Lisan al-Din Muhammad Ibn al-Jatib de Loja, a philosopher, historian, and poet who was a minister to Mohammad V at the Nasrid court in Granada between 1349 and 1372. Additionally, independent versions of the letters between the two figures have been discovered in BnF MS ESP 216 and BNE MS 9428 (García, “Textos,” 21–22). Moure proposes that versions of these letters may have circulated independently as part of Enrique II's propaganda campaign. He also believes that these letters could have influenced Ayala's versión vulgar (Moure “Otra versión,” 79).
57Ayala, CPE, 1367, xxii.
58E quanto a la quinta ocasion del dañamiento del rrey, es la crueldad e la mengua de piedad. E el rrey que dellas husa rrecresçera entre el e los suyos grande escandalo … e deue temer a Dios quando da pena al pecador e sepa commo es omne commo el. Ayala, CPE, 1367, xxii.
59E las ocasiones que acaescieron a los rreyes por el forniçio publicos son. E vna dellas fue quando el conde don Yllan metio los moros al Andalozia por lo que el rrey fizo a su fija. Ayala, CPE, 1367, xxii.
60Although not as long as the earlier one, this letter still forms a chapter of its own and covers seven pages of text in Orduna's edition. Nearly the entirety of this material concerns Benahatin's description and interpretation of the prophecy of Merlin.
61By not including Pedro's letter in the text, Ayala does not allow the former king any agency in the construction of his own image. The reader judges Pedro through events and dialogue narrated by Ayala as well as through the written compositions of his contemporaries that have been embedded into the text. Pedro's own compositions, despite being mentioned, are entirely absent.
62En las partidas de oçidente, entre los montes e la mar, nasçera una aue negra comedora, e rrobadora, e todos los panares del mundo querria acoger en si, e todo el oro del mundo ençerrara en su estomago e despues gormarlo ha e tornara atras e no peresçera luego por esta dolençia; ca dize caersele han antes las alas e secarsele han las plumas al sol e andara de puerta en puerta e non le querra ninguno acoger, ençerrarsse ha en selva e morra y dos vezes, una al mundo e otra ante Dios, e desta guisa acabara … E fue esta profeçia interpretada por la forma contenida, la qua les en cada seso della e cree que ha de seer trayda a esecuçion en la tu persona rreal. Ayala, CPE, 1369, iii.
63García has found similar prophecies – although not specifically about Pedro I – in contemporary French sources. In these prophecies, the black bird is a positive figure that is associated with the figure of Du Guesclin, whose heraldic device featured a black eagle (García, “Textos,” 31).
64Falle quando el rrey don Alfonso tu padre era biuo e avn despues de su finamento e despues aca que rregnaste algund tienpo, que todos los del tu señorio biuian a grand placer de la vida, por las buenas costumbres de que husaua tu padre … De los quales plazeres son tirados tienpo ha todos los tus subditos por que tu eres el açidente dello por muchas amarguras e quebrantos e desafueros en que los as puesto, e pones de cada dia, faziendo en ellos muchas cruezas de sangre e de finamientos e otros muchos agrauios, los quales lengua non podria pronunçiar. Ayala, CPE, 1369, iii.
65The strategic placement of this letter in the versión vulgar of the CPE, immediately before the events of Montiel, reflects the careful literary structure of the work as a whole. By embedding the letter immediately before the death of Pedro, Ayala emphasizes the prophetic nature of the event as well as creating tension and suspense within his narrative.
66The account in the versión vulgar is also less ambivalent than that of the versión primitiva in which Ayala quickly narrates Pedro's death before moving on with his narrative. Nonetheless, in both versions an armed Enrique attacks his half-brother without any warning.
67E assi commo llego el rrey don Enrrique, trauo del rrey don Pedro, e non lo conosçio, ca auia grand tienpo que non lo auia visto. E dizen que le dixo vn cauallero de los de mossen Beltran: “Catad que este es vuestro enemigo.” E el rrey don Enrrique avn dubdaua si era el. E dizen que dixo el rrey don Pedro: “¡Yo so! ¡Yo so!” E estonçes el rrey don Enrrique conosçiolo, e feriolo con vna daga por la cara. E dizen que amos a dos, el rrey don Pedro e el rrey don Enrrique, cayeron en tierra. E el rrey don Enrrique lo firio, estando en tierra de otras feridas. E alli morio el rrey don Pedro a veynte e tres dias de março deste dicho año. Ayala, CPE, 1369, viii.
68The romances noticieros were written in support of Pedro I as well as Enrique II and often functioned as political tools that attempted to define for the listeners the attitude they should take toward the civil war. As such, they created a type of guerra civil romancística between those in favor of Pedro and those supporting Enrique (Catalán, Siete siglos, 81). Mirrer-Singer has examined how many of these works, particularly those hostile to Pedro I, might have influenced the CPE. In particular, she has argued that Ayala's account of prophecies from a cleric and a shepherd, which foretold Pedro's eventual destruction, may have been taken from contemporary romances (Mirrer-Singer, Language, 87).
69Gómez Redondo, Historia, III: 1779.
70Hillgarth and Hillgarth, Chronicle, 56.
71Ayala may have borrowed from Froissart in multiple sections of the versión vulgar. This influence can be seen in the increased emphasis on the actions of Du Guesclin, a major figure in Froissart's Chroniques, especially the interpolated account of his ransom from the Prince of Wales. Froissart's influence may also explain the additional notices about events in France and England.
72Ayala was sent to France seven times between 1378 and 1396, and he may have been in France for all of 1381. During this period, López de Ayala served Charles VI directly, and he fought with the French forces at the Battle of Roosebeck in 1382 (Orduna, Arte, 20–21).
73Sitost que li rois Henris entra en le camber où ses frères li rois dan Piètres estoit, li dist ensi par tel langage: “Ou est li filz de pute juis, qui s'appelle rois de Castille”? Adonc s'avança li rois dans Piètres, qui fut moult hardis et crueulz homs. “Mès tu es filz de putain, car je sui fiulz dou bon roy Alphons.” Et à ces mos il prist à bras le roy Henri son frère et le tira à lui en luitant, et fu plus fors de li et l'abati desous lui, sus une ambarde, que on dist en François une coute de matelas de soie, et mist main à sa coutille, et l'euist là occis san remède, se n'euist esté li viscontes de Rokebertin, que prist le piet du roy dan Piètre, et le reversa par desous, et mist le roy Henri par deseure, liquelz traist tantost une longe coutille de Castille, que il portoit à escerpe, et li embara ou corps, tout en afillant desous en amont, et tantost sallirent cil que li aidièrent à partuer … Ensi fina li rois dan Piètres de Castille, que jadis avoit régné en si grant prospérité. Froissart, Chroniques, 81–82. Translation from the English edition by John Bourchier.
74Regarding the place of the CPE in Castilian historiography, Mitre provides an overview of scholarly positions on Ayala's work (54–64), Tate argues that Ayala's histories focused more on the internal motivations of characters (33–34), and Nader claims that Ayala represents the first of a type of proto-humanistic historian in medieval Castile (76).
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Bretton Rodríguez
Bretton Rodriguez is a PhD candidate in Literature at the University of Notre Dame. His dissertation, “Narratives of Power: Making History in Medieval Castile,” examines the way that Castilian rulers from Alfonso X to the Catholic Monarch used historical narratives to justify political power and construct identity. More generally, Bretton is interested in the relationship between literature and history in medieval and early modern Iberia.