Reviewed by:

• Literature and Historiography in the Spanish Golden Age: The Poetics of History by Sofie Kluge
• Alberto Villate-Isaza

THIS NEW CONTRIBUTION BOTH CEMENTS our understanding of the Golden Age’s treatment of history as an epistemological tool and opens new avenues for research regarding the way historical poetry and historical drama made use of the ars historica: that is, historiographical metatexts that recommended stylistic approaches for achieving history’s goal of being magistra vitae. Kluge’s argument centers on how the artes historicae were instrumental not only for stimulating a rethinking of the role of history and knowledge during the early modern period, but also for expanding the conception of historical writing at the time to include “aesthetic representations of the past” (xii). The book is divided into three parts comprised of two chapters each. Each part opens with a chapter analyzing various artes historicae and artes poeticae dealing with historical poetry (chapter 3) and historical drama (chapter 5), respectively. In chapters 2, 4, and 6, Kluge expands on the ideas posed by the metatexts through illustrative examples, such as Lope de Vega’s epic poem La Dragontea (1598) and Calderón de la Barca’s historical drama El prodigio de Alemania (1634). In spite of the book’s division into three parts, there is a clear separation in the argument between the historical texts described in part 1 and the aesthetic texts of parts 2 and 3.

Literature and Historiography thus makes two strong contributions. On the one hand, part 1 shows convincingly that the proliferation of artes historicae in Spain during the long seventeenth century responded to the renewed preoccupation with maintaining a fine—and often confiicting—balance between accuracy of the historical fact and the allegorical representation of a metaphysical truth capable of rendering abiding examples for the edification of readers. Kluge’s erudition allows her to demonstrate the unresolved difficulty of achieving a clear moral lesson that, nonetheless, did not delve into “the problematic domains of deceitful poetry and manipulative rhetoric” (4) condemned by the dominant Platonic epistemology of the time. Starting with an analysis of Juan Páez de Castro’s Memorial de las cosas necesarias [End Page 171] para escribir la historia (1555), which “planted the seed … for thinking and theorizing about the writing of history as a key educational and political instrument” (5), Kluge shows how the didactic objective of historical writing was inseparable from the conception of history as an art in need of careful rhetorical construction. Through thoughtful explorations of Sebastián Fox Morcillo’s De historiae institutione dialogus (1557), Juan Costa y Bernal De conscribenda rerum historia (1591), Luis Cabrera de Córdoba’s De historia, para entenderla y escribirla (1611), and Jerónimo de San José’s Genio de la historia (1651), chapter 1 paints a complete picture of the frequent but typically unsuccessful attempts by Golden Age scholars to mitigate the ambiguity between historical accuracy and metaphysical truth. The refinement of concepts like verisimilitude, for instance, supposedly allowed writers to maintain a narrative anchored in moral exemplarity without falling into falsehood or pure fiction. But, as Kluge shows when discussing San José’s “separation of ‘words’ and the ‘things themselves in their reality”’ (19), it is also possible to represent “the truth” even if the historical narrative does not coincide with the true factual event. This, in turn, “sanctions the truth of what can be termed aesthetic historiography” (19), as historical drama or epic poetry may in fact infer true moral lessons even when based on inaccurate information.

Shifting focus, parts 2 and 3, comprising the bulk of Kluge’s argument, demonstrate with detail and rigor that Golden Age aesthetic representations of the past, traditionally categorized within the classical grouping of artes poeticae, shared many of the same underlying preoccupations as their historiographical counterparts, namely the need to reconcile poetic imagination and historical mimesis for their mutual benefit. Kluge dialogues with an impressive array of texts, both early modern and contemporary, to reveal a widespread interest in Golden Age cultural milieux for examining the past beyond the...

 审阅者：

• 
  西班牙黄金时代的文学与史学：索菲·克鲁格的《历史诗学》
•  阿尔贝托·维拉特-伊萨萨

这项新贡献既巩固了我们对黄金时代将历史视为认识论工具的理解，又为研究历史诗歌和历史戏剧如何利用历史学开辟了新的途径：即，推荐风格方法来实现的史学元文本。历史的目标是成为“magistra vitae”。克鲁格的论点集中在历史艺术如何发挥作用，不仅有助于激发人们对近代早期历史和知识的作用的重新思考，而且还有助于扩展当时的历史写作概念，将“过去的美学再现”包括在内。 (十二).本书分为三部分，每部分由两章组成。每个部分都以一章开头，分别分析涉及历史诗歌（第 3 章）和历史戏剧（第 5 章）的各种历史艺术和诗学艺术。在第 2、4 和 6 章中，克鲁格通过说明性示例扩展了元文本提出的思想，例如洛普·德·维加 (Lope de Vega) 的史诗《龙茶》( La Dragontea) (1598 年) 和卡尔德隆·德·拉·巴尔卡 (Calderón de la Barca) 的历史剧《El prodigio de Alemania》 (1634 年)。尽管本书分为三个部分，但第一部分描述的历史文本与第二部分和第三部分的美学文本之间的争论存在明显的分离。

因此，文学和史学做出了两项重大贡献。一方面，第 1 部分令人信服地表明，西班牙历史艺术在漫长的 17 世纪期间的激增，回应了人们重新关注在历史事实的准确性与形而上学的寓言表述之间保持良好（但往往是冲突的）平衡。真理能够为读者提供经久不衰的榜样。克鲁格的博学使她能够展示出获得清晰的道德教训的尚未解决的困难，尽管如此，她并没有深入研究当时占主导地位的柏拉图认识论所谴责的“欺骗性诗歌和操纵性修辞的问题领域”（4）。首先分析胡安·帕埃斯·德·卡斯特罗 (Juan Páez de Castro) 的《Memorial de las cosas necesarias 》[结束第 171 页] para escribir la historia (1555)，该文“为将历史写作作为一种重要的教育和政治工具进行思考和理论化埋下了种子……” (5)，克鲁格展示了历史写作的教学目标如何与历史作为一门需要仔细修辞构建的艺术的概念密不可分。通过对塞巴斯蒂安·福克斯·莫尔西洛 (Sebastián Fox Morcillo) 的《论历史制度对话》 (1557)、胡安·科斯塔和伯纳尔的《论征入伍历史》 (1591)、路易斯·卡布雷拉·德·科尔多瓦的《论历史、帕拉·恩滕德拉 和 escribirla》 (1611) 以及赫罗尼莫·德·圣何塞的《Genio de la》的深思熟虑的探索historia （1651）第一章描绘了黄金时代学者为减轻历史准确性和形而上学真理之间的模糊性而频繁但通常不成功的尝试的完整画面。 例如，对逼真度等概念的提炼据说可以让作家保持以道德典范为基础的叙事，而不会陷入谎言或纯粹的虚构。但是，正如克鲁格在讨论圣何塞“‘文字’和‘现实中的事物本身’的分离”时所表明的那样（19），即使历史叙述与真实情况不一致，也有可能代表“真相”。事实事件。反过来，这“认可了所谓美学史学的真实性”（19），因为历史剧或史诗实际上可能推断出真正的道德教训，即使是基于不准确的信息。

转移焦点，第二部分和第三部分，包含克鲁格的大部分论点，以细节和严谨证明了过去黄金时代的美学表现，传统上属于诗学的古典分组，与史学对应物有许多相同的潜在关注点，即需要调和诗意想象和历史模仿以实现互惠互利。克鲁格与一系列令人印象深刻的早期现代和当代文本进行对话，揭示了人们对黄金时代文化环境的广泛兴趣，以审视超越……的过去。