Aftermath of Juan Ruiz's Libro del Arcipreste

Forum AFTERMATH OFJUAN RUIZ'S LIBRO DEL ARCIPRESTE Anthony N. Zahareas Emeritus, University of Minnesota The editors of La corónica are generous in publishing the lecture as it was delivered.1 I am very grateful to them. The lecture attempts to grapple with a coherent set of what are considered to be unsolved problems in the Libro. They have been the source of troublesome readings and annoyance. What do we understand, among other things, by clerical sexuality, nature, true love, didactic art, moral exemplarity, "burlas", "Libro", and "Arcipreste"? Such questioning has often become challengingly awkward when it comes to the historical evaluation of the diverse sources that make up the various episodes of the first person narrative. The lecture deals with secular as well as spiritual arguments in assessing the historical character of religions and, in particular , their applicability to the reexamination of the practical ethics used by the Archpriest of Hita to justify his sexuality or, inversely, to propose that same sexuality as an example ofwhat good Christians ought not to do. The essential problems of"reasoning" in the text have proven elusive, creating a state of considerable confusion. The term "Aftermath" of the title refers, first, to the consequences of analyzing the Libro in terms of the historical conditions of bawdy clerics which gave rise to the fictional Archpriest; second, to some nagging concerns about Libro critics when they do not reflect upon their craft; and, third, to my own kind of criticism about the historical func1 Thirty-Fifth International Congress of Medieval Studies, Western Michigan University , Kalamazoo, Michigan, May 4-7, 2000. [Editor's note. Readers' responses to this essay are welcome for the Forum section oí La coránica.] La corónica 29.2 (Spring, 2001): 257-74 258ForumLa corónica 29.2, 2001 tion of literary forms in medieval works. The following comments are exploratory; the aim is to open up new areas of research that represent a genuine synthesis of historical and formalist perspectives. The lecture has not been altered except for adjustments in converting materials to be heard into materials to be read. Rather than interrupt the thread of the argument I have dispensed with footnotes and bibliographical references. Complete or even partial documentation offindings and arguments are in excess of the lecture. At the end, I have added a brief selected bibliography of historical sources used in this study. Quotes are from the edition by O. Pereira and A. Zahareas and I opt for the title Libro del Arcipreste (Libro) used in our edition rather than Libro de buen amor (LBA); italics are mine. It's March 1295. The diocese ofPamplona complained that it lacked clerical personne!. Archbishop Rodrigo Tello of Toledo investigated. He agreed that Pamplona needed more priests. But he added in his written report that during the visit, he personally witnessed, "inter alia", 450 cases of "clerici concubinarii". This well-known label was a euphemism for fornicating ecclesiastics. Today it all sounds funny: imagine in just one official visit, the Archbishop responsible for the diocese, gathered evidence that 450 clergymen under hisjurisdiction kept concubines . The issue, however, was a serious one because priests were ipsofacto under vows of celibacy; and to fulfill the important mission of the Church, a clergyman had to abstain from what was officially considered unlawful sexual intercourse. There is more. The interjection "inter alia" subtly suggests that there could probably be other unmentionable , more scandalous cases of priestly sexuality. Sexual matings in the diocese of Pamplona were not an isolated case but rather typical of a prevailing practice by active clergy in most communities, especially in the frontier areas of the Peninsula during the Reconquest. Cohabiting with concubines by clerics had settled into a socially recognized habit. Sanctions, prohibitions and warnings were proof that celibates were doing what they should not do - have sex. Understandably , Church authorities had internal problems in their efforts to discipline their members. What was to be done? The issues were debated both locally and in a series of Church assemblies, councils and synods. The canons were explicit: the failure of ordained priests to observe celibacy was not only sinful behavior but also disobedience of Church authorities. Forum259 This is...