Epics and Chronicles: A Reply to Armistead
Colin Smith
IN several recent publications, my admired friend Professor Samuel G. Armistead has launched, in terms strongly but courteously polemical, attacks on what he sees as weak points of modestly new approach which some have been making to medieval Spanish epic. Some us are be identified by labels others pasted upon us-neo-individualist, the British school-even though such labelling suggests a collective and even programmatic attitude certainly does not hold good. Armistead's words constituted an invitation, challenge, reply. most trenchant his studies, this respect, is The Mocedades de Rodrigo Neo-Individualist Theory.' Since I am named times this, after hesitation pick up vigorously thrown gauntlet while shaking-if mixture metaphor allowed-the hand that it enclosed, sign affectionate greeting. In brief pages, cogently reasoned amply supported references, there much stimulates thought might produce response. Here limit myself one main themes: successive versions chronicles demonstrate (as Menendez Pidal held can now seen more clearly thanks work others) dependence variations epic poems gone evolving, que han vivido en variantes, over very long periods. Appendix for only, details seven major theme, adding (p. 320) these merely those we happen know about, true number larger, indeed vast. For
Hispanic Review