of love came into being that in time permeated the literature of Southern Europe, and bore fruit, in one direction in the transcendental worship of Beatrice and Laura, and in another in the grotesque idolatry which found exponents in writers like Feliciano de Silva. This is what Cervantes deals with in Don Quixote's passion for Dulcinea, and in no instance has he carried out the burlesque more happily. By keeping Dulcinea in the background, and making her a vague shadowy being of whose very existence we are left in doubt, he invests Don Quixote's worship of her virtues and charms with an additional extravagance, and gives still more point to the caricature of the sentiment and language of the romances.
There will always be a difference of opinion as to the relative merits of the First and Second Parts of "Don Quixote." As naturally follows from the difference in aim between the two Parts, the First is the richer in laughable incidents, the Second in character; and the First will always be the favorite with those whose taste leans to humor of a farcical sort, while the Second will have the preference with those who incline to the humor of comedy. Another reason why the Second Part has less of the purely ludicrous element in it is that Cervantes, having a greater respect for his hero, is more careful of his personal dignity. In the interests of the story he has to allow Don Quixote to be made a butt of to some extent, but he spares him the cudgellings and cuffings which are the usual finale of the poor gentleman's adventures in the First Part.
There can be no question, however, as to the superiority of the Second Part in style and construction. It is one of the commonplaces of criticism to speak of "Don Quixote" as if it were a model of Spanish prose, but in truth there is no work of note in the language that is less deserving of the title. There are of course various styles in "Don Quixote." Don Quixote's own language (except when he loses his temper with Sancho) is most commonly modelled on that of the romances of chivalry, and many of the descriptive passages, like those about the sun appearing on the balconies of the east, and so forth, are parodies of the same. I have already spoken of the wearisome verbosity of the inserted novels, but the narrative portions of the book itself, especially in the First Part, are sometimes just as long-winded and wordy. In both the style reminds one somewhat of that of the euphuists, and of their repugnance to saying anything in a natural way,
