Carnivalesque Elements
With his seminal study of Rabelais in the light of medieval and Renaissance folk culture, Rabelais and His World, Mikhail Bakhtin opened up a whole new area in literary scholarship: the awareness and study of carnivalesque elements and imagery in Renaissance literature.[14] Bakhtin shows how Carnival was a time of freedom and laughter whose associated festivities and ritualistic comic spectacles "celebrated temporary liberation from the prevailing truth and from the established order."[15] It was a time of change and renewal, separate from official time; a period of systematic inversions characterized by "the peculiar logic of the 'inside out' (à l'envers ) . . . of numerous parodies and travesties, humiliations, profanations, comic crownings and uncrownings."[16] In sum, an explosion of ritual madness designed to preserve human sanity during the remainder of the regimented year.
In Don Quixote this carnivalesque madness joins with the humanistic, Erasmian folly already explored. In his masterpiece of humor Cervantes combines classical irony with the liberating, comic laughter of the popular tradition. Both social and literary currents are represented, perfectly interwoven and reconciled, in the Quixote sonnets. These embrace the novel and place it entirely witin a separate time—one of masquerade and make-believe. The book begins and ends in a carnivalesque atmosphere of laughter and parody—one that will surface repeatedly within the body of the text.
An integral part of the carnivalesque upside-down world is the disguise, the theme of the mask. Bakhtin identifies it as
the most complex theme of folk culture. The mask is connected with the joy of change and reincarnation, with gay relativity and with the merry negation of uniformity and similarity; it rejects conformity to oneself. The mask is related to transition, metamorphoses, the violation of natural boundaries, to mockery and familiar nicknames. It contains the playful element of life; it is based on a peculiar interrelation of reality and image, characteristic of the most ancient rituals and spectacles.[17]
The ubiquitous presence of the mask and masquerades within the body of Don Quixote is one of its outstanding carnivalesque elements (Micomicona, the Knight of the Mirrors, Countess Trifaldi, Barataria, men dressed as women and vice versa, etc.).[18] These episodes have been amply and well studied. However, one area that has not been mentioned in this respect is the authorship masquerade. Cide Hamete is a masked Cervantes; so are the authors of the sonnets. In the inverted world of the novel, knights of old are revived and transformed into literati to pass judgment on Don Quixote and his history. At the book's end a coterie of wretched Argamasillian poetasters pose as knowledgeable academicians. And Cervantes masquerades as all of these impersonators in order to parody and mock their counterparts in the humorless officialdom of "real" time.
All the playacting within the novel is a reflection of and is ultimately related to the first and foremost of all the masquerades: the masking of the author himself. Therefore, not only are Cervantes's authorship gambits a means of providing ironic distance, but they also anticipate and reflect a procedure he will adopt to great comic effect within the body of Don Quixote . They also wreath the novel in the liberating laughter that characterizes both the book and the festive atmosphere that reigned at the time of its publication.[19]
In his authorship masquerade Cervantes does not merely affect an assumed name. Instead he takes on the personality of each of the paladins-cum-poets. A stylistic-linguistic analysis of the sonnets reveals that while they all form a cog in the bur-
lesque wheel, each is also quite unique: their individual style matches their "author." The fact that Cervantes creates the sonnets in character is also the reason why they are so "bad": what type of poetry can be expected from such bards? It is to Cervantes's credit that he has produced such inelegant verses; to think that he did not do so deliberately is to misunderstand their purpose. Madariaga and Clemencín fell into this trap when, of Orlando Furioso's encomium of Don Quixote, the former said: "Todo este soneto es malito y enrevesado [This entire sonnet is bad and does not make sense]" and the latter: "El soneto es ininteligible y malo de veras [The sonnet is unintelligible and truly bad]."[20] Of course, it is; it was written by a madman.
Orlando's convoluted verses (Appendix 49) make sense only when we realize that he speaks from within his madness. The absurd punning (on par as meaning both Peer of Charlemagne's court and "equal") and the manifest inaccuracies of the first quatrain (calling Don Quixote "invito vencedor, jamás vencido"), together with the obscure allusions to Moors and Scythians in the final tercet, are nothing but the ravings of a selfdeclared lunatic for love. Cervantes was an adept sonneteer when he wanted to be; our analysis of the burlesque sonnets independent of Don Quixote has shown just how good they are. He was also capable of producing truly excellent serious sonnets: "¿Quién dejará del verde prado umbroso?" from La Galatea, "Cuando Preciosa el panderete toca" from La Gitanilla, and "Mar sesgo, viento largo, estrella clara" from the Persiles, to cite only a few. Therefore, our author's skill in the Quixote sonnets lies precisely in assuming so perfectly the identity of these ridiculous versemongers; literary decorum required that he do so.
And Cervantes applies the rules of decorum faultlessly to the sonnet panegyrics. Amadís, caballero enamorado par excellence, writes a somewhat soulful rendition of how Don Quixote imitated him and his penance on the Peña Pobre (Appendix 45). He uses the commonplaces of contemporary lyric poetry (the spurned lover who weeps, crazed and alone, surrounded by inhospitable nature) to refer back to himself rather than praise Don Quixote. The hyperbolic tone and sombre vocatives
("tú") are more self-praise given that Amadís perceives Don Quixote as really only imitating him. The sonnet is a mockery not only of the standard love lyric of the time and its incorporation of trite, euphuistic metaphors ("en tanto, al menos, queen la cuarta esfera / sus caballos aguije el rubio Apolo"), but also of the exaggerated poetic encomiums that so stretched the truth as to totally eclipse any semblance of reality. At the same time the sonnet pokes fun at Amadís's exaggerated sentimentality, which had led Maese Nicolás to dub him the "caballero llorón."
To best appreciate Don Belianís de Grecia's masterwork (Appendix 46), we should guide ourselves by the priest's comments to his story, expressed during the scrutiny of Don Quixote's library: "—Pues ése, replicó el cura—, con la segunda, tercera y cuarta parte, tienen necesidad de un poco de ruibarbo para purgar la demasiada cólera suya ['Well,' said the priest, 'that and the second, third, and fourth parts all stand in need of a little rhubarb to purge their excess bile']" (I: 6).
Unfortunately, Don Belianís is quite inaccessible today, but in his edition of Don Quixote Luis Murillo gives further information about this fierce paladin—the man he calls the belligerent and impetuous protagonist of El Libro Primero del valeroso e inuencible Príncipe don Belianís de Grecia : "Recibió un número extraordinario de heridas graves (Clemencin contó ciento y una en los primeros dos libros) porque no era invulnerable ni tenía armas encantadas [he received an extraordinary number of serious injuries (Clemencín counted 101 in the first two books) because he was neither invulnerable nor had magic weapons]" (pp. 62, 72). Therefore, our idea of this knight is of a quick-tempered, violent, and overbearing combatant. The sonnet conforms totally to this image of its author. The fast, choppy rhythm, produced by a surfeit of active verbs set off by commas ("Rompí, corté, abollé, y dije y hice"), reflects his "excess bile" (in other words, the fury typical of most chivalric heroes).[21] His particular arrogance is obvious in that Don Belianís boasts only of his own feats until he reaches the final verse. There he is obliged to admit that notwithstanding his own great fortune and fame, he does envy Don Quixote's deeds.
As we know, for Maese Nicolás the Caballero del Febo was
superior to all as knight errant.[22] The paladin acknowledges this recognition and his own sense of superiority shines through his words. Nevertheless, his encomium shares in the same irony as the others. He sarcastically ennobles Don Quixote by christening the humble hero godo . His irony also embraces Dulcinea, who because of Don Quixote has become famous, honest, and wise.
The systematic inversions and related carnivalesque elements we see with respect to the authorship of the poems also abound within the sonnets themselves. For example, Oriana's sonnet to Dulcinea (Appendix 47) is a tremendously ironic presentation of the "world upside-down" theme.[23] This concept is intimately linked to Carnival and other festive times of misrule in which established order is reversed. In such ritual spectacles as the feast of fools, feast of the ass, Easter laughter (risus paschalis ), joyous societies, and the French sottie, hierarchical levels are inverted and the world is stood on its head. This inversion was captured symbolically and pictorially in Europe on popular broadsheets that depict such scenes as men walking on their hands, fish flying in the air, animals hunting and even roasting men over a fire, and kings waiting on servants. In Spain these scenes were often shown in aleluyas, the earliest of which date from the nineteenth century.[24]
Helen Grant has pointed out that the idea of the world upside-down necessarily implies a world right-side-up—a harmonious one created by God according to a divine and rational order. Therefore, in the world upside-down divine order has been upset: "Inherent in the commonplace is the concept of an accepted norm, and it is therefore basically conservative."[25] This conservative view is certainly the one held by many Spanish Baroque writers. For Quevedo the world upside-down is the world created by corrupt man, whom the great satirist never ceases to scourge. It represents the world of hypocritical appearances designed to cloak reality. Quevedo, of course, uses the topos to denounce human vices in the severest of terms. Perhaps the single most striking symbol he creates to represent the world upside-down is the "buscona piramidal" from La hora de todos y la Fortuna con seso who, at the hour of justice, is upturned to reveal the corruption hidden beneath her skirts.
Grant observes the same perspective in Gracián, whose Criticón also contrasts the world as created by God with the world as man makes it.[26]
Cervantes, as always, takes a much more ambivalent attitude toward humans and their foibles. In the Quixote sonnets he subsumes the world upside-down topos into the larger buffoonesque structure of the book. In Oriana's poem, rather than making a statement about the morality of the world (either upside-down or right-side-up), he is burlesquing both Don Quixote's inverted world and the right-way-up literary world of the romances of chivalry.
Oriana's sonnet hinges on a series of systematic, burlesque inversions. She longs to trade the sumptuous Miraflores for El Toboso and her gowns for Dulcinea's Manchegan livery. She wishes she had been able to escape Amadís's embraces as chastely as Dulcinea did Don Quixote's, to be envied rather than envy, to be happy not sad, to indulge her pleasures without consequence. All these desires are, of course, totally ridiculous within the context of Dulcinea's world. Dulcinea (that is, Aldonza Lorenzo) neither desired Don Quixote nor was even aware of his amorous intentions. The knight was so exceedingly comedido in sensual terms that the idea of Dulcinea having to escape his affections is absurd.
The comicity of this sonnet lies specifically in its absurdity—the outrageousness of a literary world whose capital is El Toboso and whose queen is Dulcinea. Oriana is deposed and Dulcinea is crowned. What we see is the distorted mirror-image of the romance of chivalry, indeed, a feast of fools designed to ridicule and subvert the chivalric ideal. The sonnet heralds the eruption of disorder, madness, and consequently of robust laughter, into officialdom.
Gandalín's sonnet to Sancho (Appendix 48) is a perfect example of the mocking irony that permeates all the poems. Its comicity lies in the adept manipulation of this irony in order to ridicule Sancho by alluding to the coarse nature that belies his squirely vocation. Rather than a proper squire, Sancho becomes the butt of a Carnival joke.
By addressing him with the ludicrously pompous "salve" (a term of address applicable to gods, kings, or generally superior
beings), Gandalín symbolically crowns Sancho carnivalesque king of fools.[27] This moment will be paralleled in Part Two of Don Quixote when Sancho is finally taken to his chimerical realm "y luego con algunas ridículas ceremonias le entregaron las llaves del pueblo y le admitieron por perpetuo gobernador de la ínsula Barataria [then with burlesque ceremonies they presented him with the keys of the town and acknowledged him as perpetual governor of the island of Barataria]" (II: 45). Indeed, the sonnet follows the same carnivalesque structure that we find in Sancho's mock reign. First he is "exaltado burlescamente" (comically exalted) and finally, "[t]ras un breve gobierno . . . se halla derrocado burlescamente, según los ritos carnavalescos [after a brief reign . . . he is comically overthrown in accordance with Carnival rites]."[28] At the end of his Baratarian reign Sancho is immobilized and beaten; at the end of the sonnet he is also offended and struck. In the final tercet, Gandalín insults Sancho by addressing him as "buen hombre." Rodríguez Marín has pointed out that the term is derogatory; this is why Don Quixote becomes so incensed when the officer of the Holy Brotherhood addresses him in this way at the inn (I: 17).[29] The reference to the buzcorona is a final cruel practical joke and is reminiscent of the blows and burlesque abuse that traditionally accompany the uncrowning of the Carnival king at the end of his reign.[30]
Sancho's ironic vituperation at the hands of Gandalín in this sonnet (and the mistreatment both he and his master suffer within the text) would have been enjoyed as highly comical by the contemporary reader. Seventeenth-century Spain still indulged in a variety of aggressive acts during Carnival which must be understood within the context of the permissiveness of that festival. Julio Caro Baroja insists that Carnival represented a season of gaiety and "ocasión de tertulias donde se contaban chistes, cuentos, chascarrillos obscenos unas veces, sucios otras [occasion for parties where jokes, stories and dirty, at times obscene, tales were told]." At the same time it permitted great license and violent acts such as to "Proferir injurias a los viandantes. . . . Publicar hechos escandalosos que debían mantenerse en secreto. . . . Hacer sátira pública de as interioridades. . . . Ensañarse con determinadas personas [Hurl insults at
passers by . . . Publish scandalous secrets. . . . Make public jokes of private matters. . . . Act with cruelty toward specific people]."[31] Therefore, the dismay that we feel when we see Sancho ridiculed or Don Quixote trounced was cause for belly laughs among the reading and listening public of 1605. They would relate such violence to the seasonal festivities that were still a part of their world.
Gandalín goes on to sarcastically state that he envies our squire's jumento . Any member of the equine species is, of course, a loaded topic in burlesque literature. The donkey especially fulfills multiple roles within both the folk and the classical traditions. From the twelfth century on in Italy mock testimonials were written in Latin and the vernacular in which asses bequeathed parts of their body to various groups; nuns would often receive the penis. Another vogue of mock encomiums of the ass swept through sixteenth-century Italy. These were most often a form of moralizing social and political satire in which men were unfavorably compared with the humble, patient, and virtuous donkey.[32] A more classical, adoxographic tone characterizes an encomium of the ass contained in Pero Mexía's 1547 Diálogos . In it the donkey is praised for its humility and integrity, as well as for its practicality: the she-ass's milk is recommended as both an antidote for poison and a skin cleanser, the animal is a good mount for soldiers, and even its meat is tasty.[33] The quadruped was also prominent in the fable tradition, symbolizing stupidity and obstinacy.[34]
From the Middle Ages on, the ass was the traditional mount of the cuckold and of the husband who allowed himself to be beaten by his wife. These unfortunate souls would be forced to ride, facing backward, through the streets of fifteenth- and sixteenth-century French towns, suffering the derision of the crowds. This "chevauchée de l'âne" was gradually incorporated into the Carnival activities ("âneries") of certain towns wherein the "âniseur" would be officially designated from among the citizenry or, at times, replaced by a straw puppet.[35]
In addition to the roles mentioned above, the ass is also traditionally associated with carnality; during Carnival it often symbolized Priapus.[36] As does Sancho, the king in various carnivalesque rituals rode a donkey. The animal also figured prom-
inently in the Feast of Fools and the Feast of the Ass. In these festivals a donkey was introduced into the church and "asinine masses" were celebrated in which the priest and congregation would engage in comic braying. Thus the mention of Sancho's Dapple brings a wealth of richly symbolic and largely comical connotations to the poem.
Gandalín's initial sarcasm is the idea that Fortune, the Goddess who typically acted capriciously and blindly when apportioning her favors, proceeded "cuerdamente" (wisely) when initiating the novel squire and allowing him to escape unscathed from his duties ("sin desgracia alguna"). The ironic allusion is, of course, to the countless beatings and ignominious blanketing poor Sancho suffered in Part One.[37] The terms "varón" and "trato (escuderil)" are highly suggestive in the initial verses. The first is a term charged with significance, generally indicating a virile man of good judgment, noble conscience, and valor. To apply it to Sancho brings immediately to mind his rotund figure and occasionally cowardly nature. "Trato" is also an ambiguous word not free of negative connotations. It can suggest the idea of negotiation or unsavory dealings of many kinds; Gandalín uses it to suggest that Sancho has usurped the profession of squire and to expose his chivalrous pretensions.
Other terms point to Sancho's peasant accoutrements (azada, hoz, alforjas ) to mock his rusticity. Once again, it is the world upside-down theme; these implements are a burlesque inversion of the knightly appurtenances of sword, shield, and finery. The words themselves represent the intromission of a comic and grotesque lexicon into the sublimity of poetry and chivalry. At the same time, and in keeping with Sancho's implicit role of Carnival king, the hoe and sickle can ironically symbolize his "sceptre," that is, his fool's bauble or bladder. Because natural fools were very often of peasant origin, an historical link can be established between the buffoon and the rustic.[38] Thus these references to Sancho's rusticity provide additional oblique allusions to his carnivalesque nature.
Through his irony and malicious allusions Gandalín effectively lampoons Sancho's doubtful squirehood and reveals his true nature. In fact, he operates in much the same way as the
heartless duke and duchess who fabricate Sancho's government in order to make fun of his rustic characteristics—"tontería, glotonería y cobardía" (foolishness, gluttony, and cowardice).[39] By doing so he points out our squire's undeniable links to the Carnival tradition.
The most enigmatic of all the encomiastic sonnets is the one written by Solisdán to Don Quixote (Appendix 51). He is the only unknown element among the paladins and the only one to reveal a true understanding of Don Quixote's madness and of his history. Three-and-a-half centuries later, Solisdán's identity still remains a puzzle. Over the years several critics have tried to identify him. Clemencín judged him to be a fictional invention of Cervantes. Shevill declared his name a misprint for Solimán, emperor of Trapisonda (from the Caballero del Febo ). Riquer believed him to be a character in a now-lost romance of chivalry. According to Paul Groussac, Solisdán is an anagram for Lassindo, Bruneo de Bonamar's squire who was knighted the same day as Gandalín from the Amadís cycle.[40] Justo García Soriano feels that Solisdán is Alonso de Castillo Solórzano, pointing out that if the "i" is removed from his name, what remains is a perfect anagram for "D. Alonso."[41]
Each of these theories is necessarily problematic. Why should Cervantes invent only one paladin while transposing others from well-known chivalric romances? If the name Solisdán were a misprint, why was it not corrected in subsequent editions? And if he were Solimán, why would an emperor be included among a group of otherwise celebrated heroes? Since all the other paladins are protagonists of best-selling romances of chivalry, it does not seem likely that Solisdán could be from a romance not popular enough to have survived. Surely his name would at least have been mentioned in other works. What is the purpose of using an anagram in only one sonnet? And if adopting a character from the Amadís cycle, why use an archaic style not characteristic of those books? And why not use similar archaizing language in the other sonnets? Why create a name to satirize Castillo and not Lope? And why would Cervantes bother with an anagram when all the sonnets contain allusions to his enemies, anyway?
A logical conclusion is that Solisdán is, in fact, a Cervantine
invention.[42] In the first place, all the other paladin poets are mentioned or their actions are to some extent paralleled within the text of Don Quixote . Also, because these heroes were well known to the contemporary reader, Cervantes was somewhat constrained stylistically in composing their poems. As we have seen, their poetic style corresponds to a certain degree with their nature. A fictional character gave Cervantes the opportunity to invent a totally independent paladin. For this reason both the style and the content of Solisdán's sonnet differ markedly from that of the other encomiums. The sonnet is a tour de force of burlesque fabla —an imitation of medieval Spanish.[43] At the same time, its "author" is free to tell it like it is, and in no uncertain terms, regarding Don Quixote and his exploits. In terms of ironic distance, Cervantes is one step further removed from the poem. From this new perspective he is absolutely free to comment as he wishes on the book. A more autonomous "author" also granted Cervantes wider rein in including cutting allusions to Lope.
The use of fabla was a literary convention that came into vogue at the end of the sixteenth century to give a patina of antiquity to historical ballads and plays. Lope used it with some frequency;[44] the technique was also used, and abused, by Lope's enemy Gabriel Lasso de la Vega in his historical ballads.[45] Most characteristic of Lasso was the use of the paragogic "e" as well as archaic and often invented words.
Both Lope and Lasso used fabla with serious intent. However, when reading works written in fabla one cannot help but snicker. Their attempts to reconstruct archaic speech, given their total lack of linguistic expertise, often turn out to be unintentionally hilarious. This can be appreciated by a glance at Lope's historical plays already mentioned.
It was left to Cervantes to parody this silly and tiresome custom, hence the expressions maguer (aunque ), vos (os ), cerbelo (juicio ), home (hombre ), fazañas (hazañas ), joeces (jueces ), tuertos desfaciendo (vengando injurias ), follones cautivos y raheces (cobardes viles y despreciables ), desaguisado (denuesto ), cuitas (aflicciones ), talante (semblante ), and conorte (consuelo ). His burlesque is twofold: within the novel he makes fun of the chivalrous romances that often used such archaic language; in the sonnet he ridicules both the
pretense and the linguistic ignorance of his contemporaries who also composed in fabla .
In spite of his absurdly antiquated expressions, Solisdán nevertheless tells the truth about the novel. Don Quixote committed no base acts, while discharging his duties he did, indeed, suffer violence at the hands of "follones cautivos y raheces," and Sancho was not the best of go-betweens. In fact, the final line ("necio él, dura ella, y vos no amante") fits the trio quite accurately. Precisely because he is not an "historical" but a fictional knight, Solisdán is the only paladin to realize and admit openly that Don Quixote is truly crazy, that Sancho is a fool, and that Dulcinea is no fair damsel.
The most ironic "encomium" of the characters in Don Quixote comes from the mouths of horses. The world upside-down theme comes to the fore once again in Babieca and Rocinante's equine dialogue (Appendix 52). Here we have animals not only talking but criticizing their master to boot. Besides being the basis of the fable tradition, animal dialogues, or more specifically horse dialogues, fulfilled a special role in Spanish Golden Age burlesque and satirical poetry. One type of equine dialogue in ballad form was used by both Góngora and Quevedo to criticize contemporary customs and professions. The former's "Murmuraban los rocines" and the latter's "Tres mulas de tres doctores" are the conversations conducted "en bestial idioma" (in a bestial tongue) of groups of underfed hacks who complain about their masters à la Berganza.[46]
Rocinante and Babieca's dialogue, while clearly a part of this poetic vogue, is much more complex than generic social criticism. First, let us consider the steeds' names. "Rocinante," as Don Quixote tells us when he names his mount, is an indication of the animal's naggish condition before they embark on their adventures. However, the term "rocín" also signifies coarseness, ignorance, and foolishness. As Agustín Redondo points out, "según el testimonio de la pícara Justina, al bobo se le motejaba de rocín [according to the pícara Justina's testimony, the fool was branded as a rocín ]."[47] Therefore, we already know that one conversant is mad.
Even though we associate Babieca's name with a fiery animal that salivates heavily (babeador ), the word is also a humoristic
term meaning necio . Chapter 2 of the Crónica particular del Cid relates how young Rodrigo's godfather called him "babieca" because he chose for himself a mangy colt. The child subsequently baptized the colt "Babieca." This is why Rocinante declares himself to be "bisnieto del gran Babieca" (great-grandson of the great Babieca) in the preliminary verses written by the "poeta entreverado." Therefore, we have another fool and another fools' dialogue. However, while Rocinante realizes he is a four-legged necio (hence he calls Don Quixote and Sancho "tan rocines como Rocinante" [as much a rocín as Rocinante]), Babieca does not. How can he when he speaks from within the epic tradition that Cervantes is obliquely mocking?
The sonnet responds to another contemporary poetic vogue, which can be denominated la burla equina . This was linked with contemporary literary academies and flourished as a direct result of Lope's extremely popular 1583 Moorish ballad "Ensíllenme el potro rucio." By 1585, Góngora was so fed up with hearing Lope's poem on everybody's lips that he produced his brilliant parody, "Ensíllenme el asno rucio," thus initiating the two poets' long-standing enmity.[48] From then on rival poets would frequently insult each other with any number of equine terms: rucio, asno, rocín, frisón, Babieca, Pegaso, and so on. They would do this either openly in the academies, or "anonymously" in their poetry. Therefore, any mention of such quadrupeds was suspect and brought about indignation and immediate retaliation. The rather inflated egos of most Golden Age poets could not permit their being called a fool in so public a manner.
It was mentioned earlier that the idea of talking animals placed this sonnet within the world upside-down context of Carnival. Rocinante himself is also a carnivalesque figure. Redondo describes him as a Lenten symbol—the "macilento rocín" (emaciated nag) that was often used to symbolize Cuaresma and its accompanying hunger.[49] Indeed, Rocinante complains that he does not eat—that Don Quixote will not permit him even a mouthful of "paja." Rocinante's malicious pun refers to the fact that his master allows him neither hay nor sexual pleasure. He is doubtless remembering the disastrous outcome of the Yangüesan affair (I, 15) when his attempted dalliance with "las señoras facas" (the lady hacks) ended in a beating all around.
Poor Rocinante is not only starving but is also forcibly emasculated. The mount is as chaste as his master, but apparently not out of choice. Thus Rocinante negates the image of the horse as a noble creature and symbol of masculinity. Babieca understands the implications of the joke and denounces Rocinante as "mal criado": both mal alimentado and mal educado .
This particular sonnet is unusual in that it is placed among the encomiums, and yet rather than praise it openly denounces Don Quixote and Sancho as fools. Because of this it is in an axial position between the preliminary encomiums and final verses. It effectively anticipates the subsequent vejámenes of the académicos de la Argamasilla; in this sonnet the "authors" are vejadores rather than praisers. At the same time, and most important, the poem represents the ultimate authorship irony. By putting the sonnet in the mouths of these two particular horses, whom he then reveals to be fools, Cervantes is effectively calling asses all poets who indulge in this absurd encomiastic verse. It is the strongest statement he can make about poets like Lope. And Lope, as we shall see later, was not amused.