The Spanish connection of "The Anatomy of Melancholy"

75 th e sp a n i s h co n n e c t i o n o F TH e an a T o m y o f me l a n c H o l y an a sá e z hi d a l g o University of Valladolid Robert Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy is an encyclopedia, a summa of knowledge collected from lots of works and auctoritates, classical, medieval and modern authors. His job as a librarian gave him the possibility of reading an enormous quantity of books, some of them English and others of foreign origin. In our paper we are trying to analyse a part of these foreign sources, the Spanish ones. Our goal is to study what kind of Spanish works he read and consulted (scientific, literary, philosophical, etc.), how they are used throughout The Anatomy of Melancholy, and their importance in Burton’s masterpiece. Although The Anatomy of Melancholy seems to be a treatise dealing just with the “kinds, causes, symptomes, prognostickes & seuerall cures” of melancholy, as we find in the subtitle of the work, most scholars consider that it is something else: it is an encyclopaedia. Lawrence Babb, in one of the first monographic books about The Anatomy, reaches this conclusion: The Anatomy is not just the book which Burton originally planned to write. In the book which he actually produced, a purpose is superimposed upon a purpose. He has written something which is both a psychiatric treatise and a commentary upon men and manners... The Anatomy is organized as a treatise on melancholy, but its real achievement lies in the superimposed criticism of human behaviour. (Babb 1959: 28)1 1. The idea that Burton’s initial conception of the work was that of a typical psychological treatise seems to me a bit doubtful, although it is clear that the final result in the last edition he revised was quite different from what he had achieved in the first one. 76 As Babb points out, this feature of Burton’s work is not the result of its structure, which is very similar to that of other medical treatises on melancholy;2 the difference lies in its content (which includes reflections about politics, social organization, religion, etc.), in the satiric tone, in the usage of arguments, illustrative stories and auctoritates. The author himself, in the preface to his work, entitled “Democritus to the Reader”, admits his book is created as a compendium of quotations: I have laboriously collected this Cento out of divers Writers, ... The matter is theirs most part, and yet mine, apparet unde sumptum sit (which Seneca approves) aliud tamen quàm unde sumptum sit apparet, which nature doth with the aliment of our bodies, incorporate, digest, assimulate, I doe conquoquere quod hausi, dispose of what I take. I make them pay tribute, to set out this my Maceronicon, the method onely is myne owne, I must usurpe that of Wecker è Terentio, nihil dictum quod non dictum priùs, methodus sola artificem ostendit, we can say nothing but what hath beene said, the composition and method is ours onely, and shewes a Schollar. (Faulkner, Kiessling, Blair 1989-1994: 11) Of course, the usage of authorities is not an original characteristic; in fact, Babb considers it a peculiarity that links the Anatomy not so much with the “new science” as with the “old science”, because of its almost blind reliance on authority (Babb 1959: 57 ff.). However, there is one important difference between Burton’s work and many others: the number of authors he quotes is over 1300 (Babb 1959: 57 ff.), in which we may include classical, medieval and contemporary writers. How was it possible, for a Renaissance man, to have access to so many sources? In general terms, we may say that the answer is straight: after studying at Christ Church College, Oxford, he was in charge of the library for a time: I have beene brought up a Student in the most flourishing Colledge of Europe...; for 30 yeeres I have continued (having the use of as good Libraries as ever he had) a Scholler3... (Faulkner, Kiessling, Blair 1989-1994: 3) It seems that he had access also to the Bodleian library, and, besides, he gathered himself a very important library, with more than 1700 titles (Kiessling 1988. Kiessling 1991). It is clear, then, that he was a book lover, as it is reflected in his masterpiece. As we have already said, the authors he mentions belong to several periods, and also to a great variety of geographical origins. Our intention here is to analyse the references to Spanish works found in the Anatomy of Melancholy. Before beginning the study of these books in the Anatomy of Melancholy itself, it might be interesting to determine the books related to Spanish subjects Burton had in his own library.4 First of all, we must divide them into two groups: those written by Spanish authors, and those talking about Spanish subjects. In the first 2. The structure of the work, presented in synopses, would, in fact, make the readers think that the work is just devoted to medical subjects. A facsimile copy of the synopses may be found at the latest complete edition of Burton’s work, the one I am using and quoting in this paper (Faulkner, Kiessling, Blair 1989-1994). See also Fox 1976. 3. In one of the notes to this fragment he says he has been “keeper of our Colledge Library”. Cf. Simon 1964: 1 ff. and Bamborough 1989: xvi. 4. See Appendix I for the list of all these works. The numbers in square brackets refer to that appenan a sá e z hi d a l g o 77 group, we find a wide variety of interests: geographical books [512], accounts of the Eastern and Western Indies [306, 392, 695, 1484], biographies [1345], supernatural subjects [982], but most of them are religious books [324, 391, 590, 794, 864, 1044, 1345, 1400, 1668], which could be considered usual in a divinity scholar. One of the most striking features in the reckoning of these Spanish books is that there is only one medical book [1050], which is not specifically devoted to melancholy. It is also interesting to point out that just one of these books is written in Spanish [733], and all the other Spanish works he uses are originally in Latin or translated into Latin. Babb states that “there is no substantial evidence that he knew Spanish” (Babb 1959: 54-5).5 This supposition will be revised when we study the Spanish works in the Anatomy. Finally, it is also remarkable that there is not any Spanish literary work in Burton’s library. The second group, that of works referring to Spanish subjects, could be considered as the result of Burton’s interest in history: they are libels, relations, chronicles of concrete events, even diplomatic and religious problems between England and Spain. Although we find some examples of translations into English from Spanish works [26, 28, 72], most of these texts are written by English authors in English [321, 346, 756, 760, 962, 963, 1215, 1337, 1677], so what we might expect is that Burton’s concept of the Spanish affairs is conditioned by the anti-Hispanic climate dominating England in the 17th century. This revision of Burton’s library could take us to some preliminary conclusions: his interest in Spanish books seems to focus on religious and theological subjects; most of these works were initially written in Latin, but when the original version is in Spanish, he tries to have the Latin translation. His interest in history comprises, besides, works dealing with Spanish affairs (as well as from other European countries, we must add), but in this case he relies more on his fellow countrymen than on any other historians. But does Burton’s library reflect somehow the usage of Spanish sources in the Anatomy of Melancholy? In general, we might say that the division we have made into Spanish authors and Spanish history is, to a certain extent, similarly presented in his work: most of the references to historical events, kings, and important characters are not taken from Spanish historians but from other European sources, such as Philippe de Commynes, Jean Bodin, Antonio Beccadelli, Baldasare Castiglione, Paolo Giovio, Jean Froissart or Emanuel van Meteren. The only exceptions are the items of information taken out of Juan de Mariana and Álvaro Gómez.6 But a detailed study of the usage of Spanish authors in the Anatomy shows that Burton’s knowledge of these works is quite different from what we might expect just analysing his library. First of all, we must bear in mind that the number of these works is, comparatively, really scant, if we take into account the 5. Simon cites some biographers who considered he was almost bilingual in English and Latin [Simon 1964: 29]. We must remember that he was the author of the Latin play Philosophaster. 6. The list of the main historical references and their sources in the Anatomy appear in Appendix II a. th e sp a n i s h co n n e c t i o n o F TH e an a T o m y o f me l a n c H o l y 78 whole number of authors quoted throughout the work, we only find fifty-one Spanish authors quoted7, out of more than 1200 in the whole work. Secondly, the knowledge of Spanish works Burton shows in the Anatomy is larger than what we may conclude from the analysis of his library, where we have only found twenty-one Spanish texts; however, he quotes some of the texts he had in his library: those by Cipriano Eichovio [12], Cristóbal de Fonseca [590], Pedro de Ribadeneyra [1345], and also some authors (without a concrete bibliographical reference) whose works have also appeared among his books: Bartolomé de las Casas [306], Hernán Cortés [392], Fray Luis de Granada [699], San Ignacio de Loyola [864], Ramón Llull [982], Luis Mercado [1050] and García de Silva y Figueroa [144]. And thirdly, there is a wider variety of subjects in his masterpiece. It is still true that most of the titles quoted are related to theology (7, 8, 14, 17, 20, 21, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, 50, 51), but the ones he uses more often are medical treatises (4, 13, 16, 26, 27, 48, 49), although in his library he had just one Spanish title of medicine. Besides, there are still works dealing with the Indies (1, 6, 10, 19), with moral philosophy (23, 35, 46, 51), history (24, 25), biography (15, 37), and some unique titles of astrology (5), geography (12) and del Río’s work (11) about supernatural subjects, quite useful for Burton in several passages about devils and superstitions. Maybe the most important contrast with what we have pointed out in his library is that in the Anatomy, Burton mentions some important Spanish literary works (2, 3, 9, 18, 31, 33, 39). In these quotations of Spanish works and authors, Burton, as he does with other citations, is not systematic in the bibliographical references: sometimes he gives just the name of the writers, sometimes he adds a bit of the original text (including, from time to time, his own translation into English), and occasionally he gives the complete reference to the work he is alluding to. Some scholars have considered this varied ways of citation are due to the fact that Burton relied on his memory; in fact, he was well-known among his contemporaries by his good memory (Babb 1959: 44; Renaker 1972). The point is that, when he mentions Spanish works, he sometimes gives the bibliographical reference, and sometimes it is omitted. Then, we may only examine with certainty the cases where he gives us a complete bibliographical citation. According to this, then, it seems that he used most of these works in the Latin version (1, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28, 29, 32, 36, 37, 38, 39, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51), mainly because the majority of the titles he mentions were originally written in the classical language (and it is also noteworthy to say that all of them were very successful works, that had gone through several editions). The only exceptions are Fonseca’s Amphiteatrum amorum8 (14) and one literary work, Celestina9 (39), both originally written in Spanish, whose title is indicated by Burton in Latin. Some names of Spanish works appear in English (1, 4, 15, 31, 51). In the 7. Vid Appendix II for the complete list of these works, where we have numbered the items and placed them in brackets, used for the references in the body of the article. 8. The original Spanish version was entitled Tratado del Amor de Dios, published in 1590. 9. The Latin translation was done by Gaspar Barth, with the title Pornoboscodidascalus latinus, published in Frankfurt, 1624. Renaker (Renaker 1972: 392-3) warns about the possible confusion between an a sá e z hi d a l g o 79 case of Acosta’s Historia natural y moral de las indias (1), it was translated into English by Edward Grimstone, and published in 1604, so Burton could have known this rendering into his own language. Ortúñez de Calahorra’s Espejo de Príncipes (31) was also translated into English as Mirrour of Princely Deedes and Knighthood in 1579; the title Burton uses to mention this work, The knight of the Sun, was probably a subtitle taken from the French edition (Eisenberg 1975: x x x , x l v i i i ). There are still two more titles in English: Life & deeds of Francis Ximenius by Álvaro Gómez de Castro (15), and the Fable of Man by Juan Luis Vives (51). We have found no translation into English of any of these works before Burton’s death. Besides these exceptional cases, we may consider that there is a general tendency which seems to point to Burton’s preference for the Latin language in the Spanish works, there are some doubtful allusions, where it is not possible to know whether he was using a Latin, Spanish or English text, and, significantly, all of them are literary works. With the already mentioned exception of Celestina (39), and most likely Espejo de Príncipes (31), it is really difficult to distinguish which is the version Burton used to read these literary works: all of them had been already translated into English when Burton published the first edition of this work,10 but our author does not give any sort of hint with regard to the concrete source he was using. Maybe a useful help to discover the language in which he read these books would be to pay attention to the literal quotations from the texts. Unfortunately, not all these works are mentioned in the Anatomy, and the ones with higher incidence are the Latin texts dealing with medicine (4, 13, 16, 26, 48, 49) and theology (14, 21, 23, 28, 29, 32, 43, 47, 51), and those of Martín del Río (11) and Cipriano Eichovio (12). As for the titles mentioned in English and the doubtful cases, only in one of them there is a quotation, in Vilanova’s Book of heroical love (4), whose text appears in Latin and English, so probably, as in many other cases, Burton was using a Latin version and he translated himself the quotation into English.11 It seems likely, at least for Vilanova’s book, that Burton gave the English version of the title, although the work was never translated, as we have already seen for the English titles of Álvaro Gómez de Castro’s (15) and Vives’ works (51). In sum, as we had already foreseen, Burton shows an inclination to use the Spanish texts in their original Latin version or in the Latin translations of those this text and that of Aretino’s Capricious Dialogues, translated also by Barth as Pornodidascalus (Frankfurt, 1623), which have usually been mistaken as one single work. See Castells 1996. 10. Mateo Alemán’s Guzmán de Alfarache was translated in 1612 by James Mabbe. (Verdaguer 1987). El Quijote appeared in an English version in 1612 and 1620 by Thomas Shelton (Cunchillos 1987). Thomas Paynel published the English version of Amadís de Gaula through the French text in 1568; in 1581, Anthony Munday wrote Palmerin of England, also from the French version. (Underhill 1899: 375 ff.). 11. It is quite common to find in the Anatomy quotations in Latin and English; and usually the versions are done by Burton, sometimes literally and sometimes adapting the original text to his own purposes (Sáez Hidalgo 1997). th e sp a n i s h co n n e c t i o n o F TH e an a T o m y o f me l a n c H o l y 80 works. However, it is not always evident that he used them at all, especially when he just mentions the author, but there is no reference to the work (5, 6, 17, 19, 22, 24, 25, 27, 30, 34, 41, 42, 44, 50), and even when there is not a concrete passage mentioned (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 20, 31, 33, 36, 37, 38, 45, 46). For example, it is remarkable that he refers twice to Amadis (3), Palmerín (33) and El Espejo de Príncipes (31) close together (and once El Quijote (9) is added too), as examples of “play-books” and “love toys”. Here, it is obvious that Burton is connecting these works because they belong to the same generic group, which was quite fashionable at the moment in England and the rest of Europe, as it can be seen by the amount of translations and new texts during the late 16th century and the early 17th century; however, there is no evidence that he might have read or used them for The Anatomy of Melancholy. Another important point to take into account in our analysis is the textual history of the Anatomy of Melancholy. The first edition of the text was published in 1621, and he revised five more editions (1624, 1628, 1632, 1638, 1651; the last one, posthumous). In thirty years, the Anatomy grew more than a thirty percent (Faulkner, Kiessling, Blair 1989-1994: xxxvii ff.), and his additions affect not only the content, but also the bibliographical references and notes. The majority of the quotations or references to Spanish books and authors appeared in the first edition (about a sixty percent); as we have already said, most of the Spanish works used by Burton were very well-known texts, published in the sixteenth century and, usually, they had been edited several times, therefore our author had the possibility of consulting them for his first edition. Some later additions reflect Burton’s updated knowledge of the editorial world: Juan Luis de la Cerda’s De angeli custodis ministerio (8), which was published in 1631 was quoted in the 1638 edition, probably because there was no time to include it in the previous one. In general, the addenda do not seem to have a systematic character, and some works, such as Amadís (3), are mentioned once in the first edition, a second reference is added in 1624, and another one in the following issue of the text. However, there is one detail that attracts our attention: most of the additions of the references we are studying were included in 1628. A meticulous study of these additions shows that there are two books included in this issue of the Anatomy because the works mentioned were just published: Cristóbal de Fonseca’s Tratado del Amor de Dios (14) was translated into Latin in 1623; and Barth’s version of La Celestina (39), the one mentioned by Burton, appeared one year later. Although there is one mention to Rodrigo de Fonseca which appears in the first edition, the references to his Consultationum medicinalium (14), published in 1622, appear from the 1628 edition.12 Besides these cases, we find, for example, that most of the references to Guevara (18) appear also for the first time in this edition, although his works had been translated into English several decades 12. The appearance of such an updated information of newly published books means, according to Bamborough that “although most of his erudition today seems recondite and only of antiquarian interest –if of any interest at all– it was to him and his first readers fresh and exciting, and part of a great and continuing expansion of knowledge” (Bamborough 1989: xxii). an a sá e z hi d a l g o 81 before. Likewise, almost every quotation from Mercado’s medical treatises (26) is included for the first time in 1628, in spite of the fact that they had been published several years before. It is quite difficult and daring to draw a conclusion out of all these data related to the changes in each edition. There might be sundry factors to explain them: from chance to a sudden interest in Spanish works. Maybe it is the time to consider one important aspect that might be acting as a prejudice in our paper: we are examining the “Spanish works in the Anatomy of Melancholy” as if they were a whole, a coherent and closed system of references for Burton. Yet, we have already said that most of them are originally Latin texts, as the majority of the scientific and theological printed matter in Europe, so we might wonder: when Burton quotes, mentions and talks about these authors and books, is he having in mind a sort of “national identity”, separated from others? Again, the answer is not easy, especially in a work with such a copiousness of sources. Burton seems to know the national origin of some authors, and he openly says that Rodrigo de Fonseca, Cristóbal de Fonseca, Álvaro Gómez and many others writers are Spanish, but the knowledge of their birthplace does not mean he considers them a concrete and independent group of interest. The only internal evidence we have to solve this question is that of the proximity in the usage of Spanish sources in the Anatomy, that is, to see whether these works appear close together in the quotations. We have already referred to the concurrence of some novels of chivalry, clearly related to each other by origin and genre. Besides, there are also some events of the conquest of Western (and sometimes Eastern) Indies where there is a coincidence of Spanish authors, such as Acosta and Herrera y Tordesillas (Faulkner, Kiessling, Blair, 1989-1994: I, 44); some medical allusions, as when he mentions, among others, Luis de Mercado and Francisco Valles to broaden the points of view about the causes of the symptoms (Faulkner, Kiessling, Blair, 1989-1994: I, 419). One of the most curious concurrences is that of Arnau de Vilanova, Luis Mercado and Rodrigo de Castro –Spanish, according to Burton, but Portuguese in fact– (Faulkner, Kiessling, Blair, 1989-1994: I, 230), which could denote an interest in connecting them according to their nationality. In spite of this, and of the several other examples of simultaneity, we cannot consider it a systematic usage throughout the Anatomy of Melancholy; usually, it is just the common subject they deal with that brings them together, and, as we have already seen, the subjects of theology and Indies are mainly treated by Spanish authors. One final point we would like to remark is some astonishing usage in Burton’s masterpiece of works written by Jesuits. It is not strange that the relations dealing with discoveries of new lands, a good deal of them written by members of the society, would be used by Burton. For example, the accounts of Japan are taken from Acosta, Loyola, S. Francisco Javier (Faulkner, Kiessling, Blair, 19891994: II, 9). But maybe it is more amazing that he includes in his theological sources several Jesuit authors (Juan Luis de la Cerda, Juan Maldonado, Martín Azpilcueta, Juan de Pineda, Pedro de Ribadeneyra, Francisco Suárez, Francisco de Toledo, Juan Bautista Villalpando, and Ignacio de Loyola himself), usually th e sp a n i s h co n n e c t i o n o F TH e an a T o m y o f me l a n c H o l y 82 concerned with Counter-Reformation, and defending the Roman positions against the Church of England. Burton attacks all these “popish” attitudes, and, however, he includes most of their opinions in the Anatomy. It is one of the several contradictions he presents, in his attempt to show all the possible points of view concerning every subject. Probably, the only conclusion we may draw from all this descriptive analysis is that Burton used Spanish works (not many, and just fashionable texts), usually in Latin (although he could have known some English translations), and that his interests were mainly concerned with theology and medicine. It is almost impossible to find in the Anatomy a systematic usage of these sources, as Burton’s masterpiece is not systematic at all;13 its continuous growth through additions, the variety of subjects he puts together, the contradictory opinions he admits show a work of cumulative knowledge, though with an apparent clear structure, as Ruth A. Fox has pointed out (Fox 1976: 1 ff.). The attempt to reconstruct Burton’s usage of this sources is similar to that of Adso of Melk in The Name of the Rose, when, after the library has been on fire, he manages to rescue some pages, fragments, even some books. With them, he tries to reconstruct the whole meaning of the library. The result is, therefore, a story made out of blurred traces. APPENDIX I: SPANISH BOOKS AND BOOKS CONCERNING SPANISH SUBJECTS IN BURTON’S LIBRARY14 a) sp a n i s h b o o k s : [204] Brandolinus, Lippus [Brandolini, Aurelio]. De ratione scribendi libri tres... Adjecti sunt, Jo. Ludovici Vives, d. Erasmi Roterodami, Conradi Celtis, Christophori Hegendorphini, de conscribendis epistolis libelli. Basileae. (Ex off. J. Oporini). (1549, Mar.) [306] Casaus, Bartholomaeus [Casas, Bartolomé de las], Narratio regionum Indicarum per Hispanos quosdam devstatarum verissima: prius quidem... conscripta, & ano 1551. Hispali, Hispanice, anno vero hoc 1598. Latine excusa. Francoforti. Sumpt. T. de Bry, & J. Saurii typ. 1598. [324] Cerda, Joannes Ludovicus de la. De excellentia coelestium spirituum; imprimis de angeli custodis ministerio, liber. Parisiis. Ap. S. Cramoisy. 1631. [391] Corranus, Antonius [Corro, Antonio de]. Sapientissimi regis Salomonis concio de summo hominis bono, quam Hebraei Coholet, Graeci & Latini Ecclesiasten vocant... Londini. [J. Charlewood f.] per J. Wolfium. 1579. 13. According to this, we consider that Castells’ belief that the Anatomy is “one of the first English commentaries on Fernando de Rojas’ work” (Castells 1996: 71) implies a systematic presentation and analysis of this work, which is just used to exemplify some cases of love melancholy. Burton, then is using it in a fragmentary way, and not with a consistent study of the characters, as Castells supposes. 14. We follow Kiessling’s book, and use the numbers in his catalogue, as well as the descriptions an a sá e z hi d a l g o 83 [392] Cortesius, Ferdinandus [Cortés, Hernán]. Praeclara... de nova maris oceani Hyspania narratio... Carolo... transmissa: in qua continentur scitu,... incolarum mores puerorum sacrificia, & religiosas personas, potissimumque de celebri civitate Termiztitian... per doctorem Petrum Saguorgnanum... in Latinum versa. (Norimberga). (Per F. Peypus). (1524, 4 No. Mar.) [451] Delgadillo de Avellaneda, Bernaldino. A Libell of Spanish lies: found at the sacke of Cales, discoursing the fight in the West Indies, ... and of the death of sir Frances Drake. With an answere... by Henrie Savile. London. J. Windet. 1596. [512] Eichovius, Cyprianus. Deliciae Hispaniae et index viatorius, indicans itinera, ab urbe Toledo, ad omnes in Hispania civitates... Ursellis. Ex off. typog. C. Sutorii. 1604. [590] Fonseca, Christophorus. Amphiteatrum amorum... A fratre Cornelio Curtio... Latio donatum. Ingolstadii. Typ. W. Ederi. 1623. [695] [Gonzalez de Mendoza, Juan] Gonsalvus, Joannes. Nova et succincta, vero tamen historia de amplissimo, potentissimoque, nostro quidem orbi hactenus incognito, sed perpaucis abhinc annis explorato regno China; ... Opera Marci Henningo Augustani. Francofurdi ad Moenum. N. pub. 1601. [699] Granatensis, Ludovicus [Luis de Granada]. Loci communes philosophiae moralis, in tres tomos digesti: in quibus Senecae, Plutarchi, aliorumque... sententiae,... continentur. Coloniae. Ap. A. Quentelium. 1604. [733] Gutierrez de Toledo, Alvaro [Gutterius, A.]. El sumario de las maravillosas: y espantables cosas que en el mundo han acontescido. (Toledo). (Por Remon de Petras) (1524, Deziembre) [794] Herrera, Alphonsus de. Disceptatio adversus Lutheranos de valore operum bonorum: qua dilucide ostenditur quid per virtutis opus Christianus quisque apud deum promoveat. Pariis. Ap. S. Colinaeum. 1540. [864] Ignatius Loyola. Mysteria patrum Jesuitarum. Ex ipsorum scriptis, cum fide, eruta. Lampropoli. Ap. R. Liberum. 1631. [982] [Lullius], Raymundinus. Opusculum... de auditu kabbalistico: sive ad omnes scientias introductorium. N.p. N. pub. 1601. [1044] Mendoca, Francisco de [Mendonca]. Viridarium sacrae ac profanae eruditionis, ... Coloniae Agrippinae. Ap. P. Henningium. 1633. [1050] Mercatus, Ludovicus. Libellus, de essentia, causis, signis & curatione febris malignae; in qua maculae rubentes similes morsibus pulicum per cutem erumptunt. Basileae. Per C. Waldkirch. 1594. [1345] Ribadeneira, Petrus. Illustrium scriptorum religionis societatis Jesu catalogus, Lugduni. Ap. J. Pillehotte. 1609. [1400] Salamanca, Alexius. De republica Christi dialogi tres:... Lugduni. Ap. S. Barptolemaei Honorati. (Excud. J. Faure). 1556. [1484] Silva Figueroa, Garcia. De rebus Persarum epistola... ad marchinem Bedmarii. Antverpiae. Ex. off. Plantiniana. 1620. [1653] Vega, Didacus de la [Vega, Diego de la]. Conciones vespertinae quadragesimales, super septem poenitentiales Psalmos,... Lugduni. Ap. H. Cardon. (Excud. Guich. Jullieron). 1600. th e sp a n i s h co n n e c t i o n o F TH e an a T o m y o f me l a n c H o l y