Rewriting History in the "Coplas de la Panadera"

Abstract

The Coplas de la panadera have been read primarily as a typical fifteenth-century political satire expressing bourgeois court officiais' negative opinion of the aristocracy, whose partisan activity against don Alvaro de Luna was one of the main causes of the Battle of Olmedo. Nilda Guglielmi and Julio Rodriguez Puertolas have seen a distinctly pro-Luna position developed in this poem, claiming that, of all the individuals mocked in this lengthy catalogue, only King Juan II of Castile and his favorite, don Alvaro, are spared (Guglielmi 72-73, 83; Rodriguez Puertolas 128). If this were the case, we would expect to see don Alvaro featured prominently and his conduct in the Battle of Olmedo praised. However, the panadera does not mention Luna until stanza 27, more than halfway into the poem, and she places his portrait between those of Pero Sarmiento and Inigo Lopez de Mendoza, the soon-to-be Marques de Santillana. Moreover, her assessment of don Alvaro is not exactly positive:Obra muy clara e plazerase mostro ser, y notable,la que fizo condestablecon los que se combatiera,mas quebraran la barreramuy aina sin dubdancasi la su buena ordenancaalgun poco se durmiera.1 (27: 240-47)The first four lines of this stanza damn Luna with faint praise, while the last four judge his leadership as less than it should have been. Compare his treatment with that of the Marques:Con habla casi estranjera,armado como frances,el noble nuevo marquessu valiente voto diera,e tan rezio acomitieracon los contrarios sin ruego,que vivas llamas de fuegoparecio que les pusiera.2 (28: 249-56)After mocking Santillana's foreign stylistics, the panadera ironically praises his enthusiastic attack. Identifying him as el noble nuevo marques reminds the audience that his new title resulted from his feats in this battle, as her faint praise of Luna's obra would also call to mind his quite generous rewards. Her satire extends, then, to the reception of the Battle of Olmedo, the rewards handed out to the victors, and the propaganda generated as a result of the Castilian victory. I propose that the primary target of the panadera's satire is not the aristocracy per se nor the political chaos caused by civil conflicts and invasion; instead, the panadera, or rather the poet who adopted her persona, parodies legitimizing narratives, such as the official account of the battle read in court by Juan II in order to justify the rewards bestowed on Luna.3 This poem represents the Battle of Olmedo as a conflict between two Juans, that is, between Juan II of Castile and his older cousin Juan I of Navarre. The panadera departs from other interpretations of this conflict by presenting Juan II, not Alvaro de Luna, as the commander of the Castilian loyalist forces, ordering his troops to take the field and inspiring fear in his enemies; she further identifies Juan of Navarre as the leader of the opposition forces: El de Olmedo cabecera / que era buen rey de Navarra (38: 339-40). She caricatures Juan of Navarre twice, in stanzas 38 and 45, in the second verse condemning him to Hell. This neat opposition between the legitimate king of Castile and the demonic invader breaks down, however, due to the similarity and permeability of the two factions, including knights who switch sides during combat; as I shall show, the universal loss of order leads to chaos. The choice of a panadera as the mouthpiece for this satiric narrative gives rise to the disruptive critique of power structures and the individuals who represent them, including God himself. As a degraded female laborer, her embodied perspective reverses normative hierarchies and exposes the failings of the aristocracy.The panadera is an eyewitness to the Battle of Olmedo, one of the climaxes in the long-lasting rivalry between the Infantes of Aragon and don Alvaro de Luna, Juan II's favorite.4 Luna's influence over the king created deep divisions among the Castillan nobility; many saw him as threatening their rightful positions and as acting against their interests, while others benefited from his policies. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.