Well, then
I think we're already live
too, so we can adjust to the
timings and the program.
We can begin with the inauguration of these
third International Days of Historical
Novel between archive and fiction.
This is the third edition of the Meeting
and, of course, we are grateful.
It is only right to thank both the attendees
and all the speakers and participants who
have joined this initiative and, of course,
the Rey Juan Carlos University, which
sponsored the meeting, provided us with the
facilities, and has been actively collaborating
with this type of initiative, which I will
comment on later. And I think I must first
reflect on this fantastic lineup we have,
because comparing it with the previous ones,
with the other two editions, you can see
a real talent pool of artists.
So let's also give thanks to our dear Azucena, who has
been the mastermind behind such a wonderful poster,
Carmen, and we continue to maintain the initial objective
that gave rise to this event, namely to offer researchers
and the general public an interdisciplinary platform
in which to return to the study of historical, romantic
narrative and its classics, without ruling out new
contributions from the disciplines that make up the
well-known binomial that characterizes the historical
novel: literature and documentary archive.
In other words, it is a meeting that has been
bringing together for three editions, for
three years, historians, philologists,
and scholars of literature, to turn their
gaze towards the historical novel,
fundamentally of medieval scope, due to the
dynamics and studies of the different groups
that organize the meeting, but also of other
periods, in other, in other modalities,
because we have broadened objectives and horizons.
The aim is, in a way, to recover a literary tradition
largely overshadowed by the later realist tradition,
but which, we believe, is still relevant and essential
to understanding the emergence of historical and medieval
narratives in our literature, both classical and contemporary.
It is certainly curious that in the 19th century, when
the historical novel was established as a modern
genre, Manzoni, despite contributing to the genre
with at least one of the most outstanding novels, ended
up pointing out the impossibility of the historical
novel since it could be neither history nor literature
and therefore was destined to perish.
Did the Italian author not say that this was his thesis?
He intended to demonstrate, and believed he had demonstrated, that the
historical novel is a work in which the necessary is impossible.
A work in which two essential conditions cannot be reconciled cannot
even fulfill one, making a confusion contrary to the form inevitable;
a work in which history and fable must intervene, without it being
possible to establish or indicate in what proportion or relationship
in the end, a work that cannot be composed in an adequate way because
its subject is intrinsically contradictory to the vision of the fact
that the Italian made a deep impression on critics as lucid as Amadeo
Alonso, who at the beginning of the 20th century emphasized the
unviability of the historical novel in the conflict.
History.
Poetry is where his own exhaustion resides.
The novel cannot aspire to the rigor of history while
history also aspires to become a subject of
fiction; this poses an obstacle to true poetry.
However, I believe that this possibilist thesis is conditioned
by the high concept that both Manzoni and Alonso had of the literary
work and the functions they attributed to artistic composition or historical study.
Currently, the historical novel has embarked on new paths of
undeniable artistic content based on the rethinking of
the relationship between history and literature.
But it also occupies a place in the leisure entertainment market,
perhaps less elevated, but equally necessary and respectable.
Soldevila had already warned that the success of the historical
novel is a cyclical phenomenon, but also a necessary one.
The historical novel of the genre that can save the
novel by making it return to its origins.
Histories, however, continue to preempt some
considerations regarding the historical
novel, considering it so often a minor genre,
a secondary genre, even sometimes for literature.
I remember, for example, you will know these.
The recent controversy and spat
between academic Arturo Pérez
Reverte and writer David Uclés, and
in some statements by the former,
Pérez-Reverte said before the
controversy arose that he praised
the novel and the production of David Uclés.
And yet, those statements are still curious or
striking, precisely because he was talking about
how they have it there on the slide, that it is
literature, not a historical novel, it is literature.
That is to say, it is implicitly granting the
novel, the historical novel, a position
subordinate to that of literature itself, as if they were
two things
different.
Or, as is the nature of the historical novel itself, it could not be considered
high literature.
That one is especially curious, because Pérez Reverte has
precisely written historical novels, novels about
history, novels of a historical declaration.
And well, perhaps a greater defense of the genre
would be fitting from an author who has cultivated it so much.
In the end,
This year, as a result of national and international research
networks, it has been decided to broaden the scope of the objectives
we have proposed for the first and second editions with thematic proposals.
For example, we have always wanted the previous editions.
Also, that these meetings would serve as a tribute that
would allow us to rescue, to recover some, some historical events.
This year, for example, they could have served as a tribute
to Urraca the First of Castile, since 2026 marks the 9th centenary of her
death.
We also intend to address new formats, expanding the corpus of study, which
is no longer limited solely to the subgenre of the historical novel, but
also to the particularities, the particularities of narrative and
nineteenth-century historiography.
Similarly, the organization has relied on the collaboration of the
University of Santiago de Compostela and the University of Rennes,
in an effort of cooperation and collaboration between
internationalization and.
I also think it is worth noting that this meeting is
part of a series of actions undertaken by various
professors at the Rey Juan Carlos University, which
has consolidated neo-medieval medievalism as one
of the pioneering lines of research in our country over the last few years.
I think there's a significant gap so far.
Today, for example, you can see on the screen that a few years
ago we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the famous
video game of the famous role-playing game.
Excuse me, and Dungeons and Dragons,
famous Dragons and Dungeons.
From transmedia narratives, gamification, role-playing
games, board game games, always revolving around that medieval period.
Last month, taking advantage of the.
On Book Day, we also celebrate the meeting, our first
medieval event, focused precisely on that children's
and young adult literature that rescues, imagines, and dreams of the Middle Ages.
Sometimes a rosy medieval era, other
times a barbaric medieval era.
But it has had notable prestigious authors,
both international, as you all know, that
it has read Tolkien, but also Laura Gallego
and so many others, in the saga of productions,
both narrative and on screen, as well known
as Game, as Game of Thrones.
Also, the meetings that have been taking place
for years, Middle Ages, Multimedia, Middle
Ages, Transmedia, Middle Ages, Mass Media,
the last of which you have on the screen, was
held in September 2025 in collaboration with
the University of Buenos Aires and the Federal
Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, and for
next year we already have the 4th edition
underway and also to give continuity, to give
visibility, we consider it absolutely necessary
that this line of study had an academic platform
where to disseminate and make known the works
that sometimes arise from these meetings.
This is the non-medieval magazine that you have in the.
The screen that is currently preparing
its 5th issue should show this in June of
this year and that has an open call for
submissions in December.
This monograph, as you see on the screen, also deals
with the eternal return of a malleable king, the
reception and reinterpretation of the Arthurian
myth in contemporary culture from the 19th to the
21st centuries, directed by Julio San Ramón, San
Román, Cazorla, currently at the University of Oviedo.
We hope that this platform will continue to host works that...
That it has dissemination, that it serves
as a meeting place for academics, scholars
and teachers in general, and with this,
making known these initiatives of both
teachers from the Rey Juan Carlos University
and from related groups with whom we have
been collaborating for a long, long time.
Here beside me is Professor Israel San Martín, with
Azucena, Don Fervor de Diego, Brais Pablo Fernández,
with whom we have been meeting and meeting both here in
Madrid and at the University of Santiago, trying to
explain, to study, what medievalism is, how it arrives,
how it is received, how it is rewritten, how the Middle
Ages is reformulated, both from the 19th century to the present day.
Also Pilar Garrido Clemente, Jacobo Hernando
Morejón, from the University of Murcia, whose
congress on the subject is the oldest. The call
for contributions for the 6th Congress that
it will organize this September.
In short, these are actions that I believe already have
a certain tradition, a certain solidity, in which many
of us are involved and in which we want to increasingly
involve more people, more teachers, more researchers,
because we believe that there is still much to say regarding
the historical novel of the 19th century.
Does one think of the catalogs still
of Ferreras, of the great writers,
the great cultivators of the genre
like Fernández Díaz and González,
with such vast productions, or Ortega Ortega and Frías?
So much so that it gives so much power to analyze, to see how that imaginary is
constructed that distinguishes it or that takes advantage of the gothic narrative.
We will have for the first one tomorrow when
Carlos Mata falls also to Miriam, to Miriam,
what what Santos and as Maria, or as that
imaginary around Almería is recreated,
sometimes manipulated, sometimes reused
and several also transforms into some in some
basic issues it is maintained from the 19th
to the 20th and in and in our days, going from
the novel, the comic to the to the screen.
Video games.
So many formats, so many works, so many authors, and so much to do.
Let this humble day serve as a
launching pad, as a meeting place,
as a space for dialogue, so that we can.
That we can do it.
Thank you all very much, and now in a few minutes we will
properly begin the meeting with the first of the conferences
we have, which will be given by Professor Israel San Martín.
Thanks a lot.
we're going to
Let's begin with the program of the conference,
and we will do so with the opening lecture by
Professor Israel San Martín from the University
of Santiago de Compostela, entitled
Medieval Historiography.
In the 19th century, Israel San Martín was a professor in the area of ​​Medieval
History at the Faculty of Geography and History of the University of Santiago de
Compostela.
His lines of research are the history of medieval millenarianism.
Historiography and history.
Medieval historiography.
Digital history and travel books in the Middle Ages.
He is the author of the book Between Two Centuries:
Globalization and Single Thought, published by the local
publisher in 2007, and editor of the books, Histories,
Images and Languages, Temporality and Contexts and the
Historiographical Debate on the End of History in Francis
Fukuyama. He has organized various international
conferences, such as the Virtual International Congress
of Medieval Eschatology, held at the University of Santiago
de Compostela in 2021, as well as numerous meetings related
to the theme of the event for which we are gathered here today,
such as the workshop Thinking about the Contemporary Middle
Ages, held at the Faculty of Geography and History of the
University of Santiago de Compostela on April 17 and 18, 2023.
The International Colloquium "Historiography in
the Long Middle Ages," which was also held at the Faculty
of Geography and History of the University of Santiago
from February 26 to 28, 2024, or the International
Conference on Neo-Medievalism, organized by the
YAKO research group and held at the University of
Santiago de Compostela on June 17, 2024, have been
part of different research projects, among which the
following stand out: "Full Medieval Millenarianism,
History and Geography, Image," sponsored by the Junta
de Galicia, in which Professor San Martín acted as
principal investigator. He has also recently
coordinated a valuable monograph on the literature
about the Camino de Santiago, which has appeared in
the journal AD Elimina, and has been, I believe, one
of the fundamental pillars, one of the supports,
also of the professors of this, of this house.
In that series of meetings, debates, and
dialogues about the medieval year, how do
we study how we approach that medieval
imaginary today, without further ado, without the Middle Ages, eh?
Literary, medieval, from the screen and so many others.
Others we measured. Perhaps it's not a no, it's a unique medieval period.
I always thank him for the enthusiasm shown
in the different projects for the teaching
he has also exercised with his pupils, with
his disciples Yago, Azucena, Eh, Pablo,
who have also been, uh, a fundamental part
of all these meetings both in the organization
and the reflections.
And well, I have the pleasure of calling Professor
Israel San Martín my friend, so I welcome you, I thank
you for being here, and whenever you dear Israel, you can begin.
Thank you very much for including us once
again in these third conferences, which
began three years ago, and the possibility
of holding them every year is an incentive
to continue reflecting on the historical
novel in the 19th century and everything
surrounding the historical novel in
the 19th century.
Precisely, as Professor Huertas explained, this year, eh?
There's also a lot of context that will help us understand
the historical novels of the 19th century themselves, huh?
Philosophical questions, huh?
Questions, uh, of historiography, questions.
Therefore, between history, literature,
philosophy, and political science,
in which, uh, as I say, uh, they create,
uh, a space mmm, truly of confluence
between different researchers and
different disciplines.
Huh? Mmm.
Today I'm going to focus on medieval history in the 19th century.
And I'm going to focus on medieval historiography in the 19th century.
From an analytical point of view of how we
have thought about medieval historiography in the 19th century.
In general terms, we have considered the general
historiography of the 19th century as a
historiography where the medieval has an important presence
And one. Mmm
an important function which is to serve as
justification for the different political
projects that are being built in this 19th century.
Therefore, the Middle Ages in the 19th century EH
acquires an instrumental character.
In a way, this idea has been the one that
EH has agreed upon in this Middle
Ages of the 19th century.
If we look at practical cases, that consensus obviously works, right?
In other words, the different materials
we can consult show us that the media
served for these projects, both
intellectual and political, of the 19th century.
Okay, mmm.
Which
Um, I propose, uh, today is precisely to
reflect a little on that and point out some
ideas that perhaps, uh, can lead to other
reflections parallel to this one.
The first one is precisely this idea of ​​consensus as, uh, mmm.
We have agreed on the historiography of the
19th century in a certain way. Who has agreed
on it and how has it been agreed on?
This maxim that I have explained has practically no answer.
Isn't it as if there were a public space, a cultural field or
a historiographical field where no one says otherwise?
thing, huh?
Professor Rebecca San Martín has hinted at this in some of her work.
That?
Hmm, not just the resource, the Middle Ages, huh?
This 19th has a political consideration,
but also an aesthetic consideration, an
environmental consideration, a
consideration of, mmm, compensation in
the face of a very difficult reality, right?
Uh, maybe.
So, that opens up some possibilities for
reflection on this issue, doesn't it?
In other words, media is not only used for the
political construction of our nations, of
our states, but it also has an aesthetic
function, an environmental function, a mental
function, and an escape from reality.
Good, huh?
That would imply something.
Correcting it would mean discussing that consensual idea that
was created about the Middle Ages in the 19th century.
But beyond whether or not we want to introduce
this idea, this fracture in the consensus, I
would like to introduce another issue that
seems important to me and for which the historical
novel is responsible, or partly
responsible, which is the audience.
We don't have two concepts. Therefore, the concept of consensus and the concept
of audience.
The medieval history of the 19th century is linked
to the audience, it is linked to being
read, it is linked to dissemination.
We will give different examples, and this also seems to me to be
fundamental to breaking that consensual idea created from the
creative centers of the creative elites, from the historiographical ones.
consolidated.
In addition to
These introductions of rupture, consensus,
and the emergence of the audience—I want
to introduce two more issues. Right?
And that also leads us to reflect on something that
Professor Huertas has put in the titles of his
conferences, which is Transmedia Middle Ages,
that is, now we talk about transmedia narratives as an argument.
We can see it in different formats.
Not on YouTube or social media, but in a newspaper, a
novel, etc. And we call that, uh, materialistic media
in the Middle Ages of the 19th century.
We could also consider it, therefore, a transmedia
age, not novels, stories, or source editions.
In other words, everything is already
present here; we should tell Scolari, who
is one of the theorists of transmedia
narratives, that he could revisit the 19th
century to complement these reflections in some way.
On the other hand, the concept of post-truth
has also been used nowadays, especially
since 2007-2008. Right?
Which is not the same as the concept of lying.
The lie, huh?
He is aware that there is a truth.
I lie, but I know there is a truth.
I can say this is NASA, but I know it's King Juan Carlos University.
I know I'm telling a lie.
Post-truth isn't interested in truth, nor is it interested in lies, huh?
Opinion and emotion.
Truth is replaced by emotion.
And that happens all the time in the 19th century.
Therefore, in those consensual nineteenth-century
spaces, in those audiences that are sought out and
that form part of the public space of the 19th century,
this idea that has been called post-truth is also
systematically present, because the 19th century
is the century of emotions, it is a century precisely
generated and built from these ideas.
What do I mean by this?
To begin with, I want to say that it seems like we are discovering
the Mediterranean, or it seems like they are discovering the Mediterranean right
now.
Many authors, based on these transmedia
reflections with concepts such as post-truth,
are constantly circulating and generating
these ideas, not with these concepts, but
with others, since at least the 19th century.
Do not consider this as a kind of genealogy
of ideas, but simply as a visitation of this
19th-century present, where we can calmly,
uh, identify things that we think are novel
today and that are working in that
19th-century historiography.
So, uh, the motivations, huh?
These reflections lead us to, uh, something that
is also supposedly developing today, right?
The other day I was listening to one of the
historians who influence the Spanish
public sphere, José Javier Esparza,
talking about the historians' dispute.
This dispute among historians is a struggle between professional
historians and historians who aren't professionals, who aren't in academia.
Right?
That lawsuit.
We will also find the professionalization
of history and non-professional historians
in the 19th century, but with an essential characteristic
in Spain
which Spanish historians took a
long time to construct, huh?
His own professional history.
And when they did, they did so from a legal perspective;
fundamentally, historians, the great historians of
this time, are basically historians of law.
There is a special case like Rafael Altamira, etc.,
but I think that's important because it allows us to
see that many historical novelists are and act as
historians, and they consider themselves as such.
Even afterwards, huh?
For me, the important thing, theoretically
in this reflection, is the reflection on the
public space or the public sphere, which is
the place that is created from liberal states,
where, well, in this case from liberal states,
different ideas circulate, intellectual
ideas, ideas of politicians, ideas of
historians, ideas from power, ideas,
demands from the audiences, etc.
That public space which, over time, was later created
by public opinion, is a concept that derives from or
has been explained by the recently deceased Jürgen Habermas.
And as I was saying before, for me the birth of the audience is important in
this 19th-century history.
In other words, when we study history, whether
now or whenever, we don't care about the audience
and we don't have to pay attention to it.
But here, many of the examples we're going to see in the
19th century are based on the audience, and we have to
incorporate that into the study of the 19th century.
Okay, what I'm about to say comes with this outline, right?
I'm going to start with a series of preliminary
considerations, uh, more reflective in the sense of how I started.
Next, I will give four examples from 19th-century
historiography, starting from the Middle Ages.
The year 1000, historiographical
colonization, the historical
novel, and animal trials are four
examples that derive not from a
position of visiting, but from a
position of working, of practice.
Therefore, the reflection I am going to make is a theoretical and practical
reflection.
It stems from practice, not
from useless theoretical
pedaling with no connection to it.
Research practice.
Good, huh?
Perhaps to begin with, with these preliminary considerations, eh?
How have we constructed the historiography of the 19th century?
We don't have Agotes, we have Moreno Alonso,
eh, for Spain, for Europe.
In other words, these are the great books that we, who have been
interested in some way in the historiography of the 19th
century, go through, and how from many of these texts and many
others, well, those consensuses are created, those consensuses
in historiography, etc. Because, let's see, the consensus
in the historiography of the 19th century is basically one
that happens in the historiography of the 19th century.
Work begins with documents, and
this work with documents leads
to history becoming a science.
That's the consensus.
OK.
What's happening?
We can refine that consensus a lot, and we can refine it based on these four
examples.
For example, they have nothing to do with each other, right?
In many cases with, with, with, with professional history, etc.
If we look, for example, at Larra or any
19th-century novelist, we will see that he
thinks he is working seriously with sources as if they were historians.
Well, public space is not Habermas's idea.
We have already announced this.
The importance of public space, the inclusion of
19th-century historiography in a public space that belongs to it.
Public space, therefore, has the cultural field, the historiographical field.
But we're staying within the realm of public
space because public space is going to be
fundamental to explaining the birth of the
audience and how, uh, that public space, uh,
makes us think about the 19th century in a consensual way, right?
The consensual historiographical form has been
described as the history of the 19th century as
something totally linked to the use of
documents and to turning history into a science.
That's the consensus, the consensus.
Habermas' idea of ​​consensus has an important limitation,
which is that it does not contemplate opposition, because
Habermas says that consensus is reached through
dialogue and the confrontation of opinions.
But who makes the consensus, who establishes
what the history of the 19th century should be?
The elites, the historiographical elites,
the educational elites, the powerful, and so
on. That's why some authors speak of a public
or positional space, that is, a public space
where one intervenes without the need for
consensus, where different forms of...
understand mmm
that 19th-century historiography.
At the present moment we are facing a public space that
is tremendously compositional, not one of rupture, lack of dialogue, etc.
And that's also important to recognize,
because it also has, uh, mmm, an epistemic
dimension to what's happening.
The elites are.
How do elites reproduce themselves? How are these
historiographical elites of different authors created?
Consensus, etc.?
There's also an important issue that
history has generally agreed is something
to be left out: fiction. Right?
And this is where the historical novel comes in.
Is the historical novel fiction, or is it actually a negotiation between the two?
Antonio said now in the presentation, that's the answer of a
historical novelist who renounces the historical novel.
To position fiction well, we have to integrate it.
And often fiction says more about reality,
and more realistic things, than reality
itself, the study of historical sources,
etc., which is often very latent and very mediated.
That's the case with what Hayden White explained to us. Right?
Also the place from which we are speaking, of course.
What is the historiography when we talk about the 19th century?
What is French history, Spanish history, Galician history?
Which?
And what if we talk about which one?
What are the characteristics or what is the situation regarding?
In other words, we have to explain that Spain in the 19th
century is already a historiographical periphery, it
is an autarkic place, etc. But we see a case of how this works.
Medievalism, huh? Medievalism, huh?
It is the study of the medieval outside of the Middle Ages in the 19th century.
We have medievalism. Some authors have introduced, such as
Professor Huertas, this idea of ​​a contemporary Middle Ages
that we can calmly apply to this moment and to other people, other young people,
for example.
Isn't that the case of the researcher Azucena Don
Carbó, who is coining the concept of the nineteenth-century Middle Ages?
So, this is an emerging field,
as Antonio said before, a field
that some might call innovative in Spain?
And we can't ignore all of this, can we?
Since there are already tools to study this
19th-century Middle Ages, let's look at some examples.
Huh? The 19th century made us revisit,
made us update many things,
many topics.
Ideologically, uh, politically,
mmm, literarily, with many nuances.
Historically. Why not?
One of them is the year 1000.
There is a year 1000 that happened in the 11th century or did
not happen in the 11th century, The terrors of the year 1000.
I am referring to the presence of the end of the world
in the 11th century itself and how that was used in a certain way.
Policy
in a historiographical way in the 19th century.
French, eh, eh!
And a debate ensued.
that eh
It continues to this day, and it is
whether the terrors of the year 1000
existed or whether the terrors of
the year 1000 did not exist.
Different authors here have Michel as a rider,
etcetera, eh?
To amplify the idea that those terrors did indeed happen.
Well, here's an example.
No, it's not worth it.
But there were also others who denied those terrors.
No? And King
Rosie Plain?
Yes. Several historians began to deny the
existence of those terrors as early as the year 1000.
Many even suggested that the terrors of the year 1000 were
instigated by the church to seize many properties.
It is true that 11th-century France is full of myths,
full of exploitation, full of false ideas.
For example, another idea, a very controversial one, is that of the peace
of God.
No? What? Peace.
No? Whether it's peace or war.
Well, uh.
Different.
Texts that talk about the defenders, the year 1000, etc.
We also have it in the year 1000.
One important issue, which is the
edition
from the texts of the year 1000.
For example, here we have, uh, an edition of El Cronista,
one of the essential chroniclers of this year, 1001 is
Glauber and others, in addition to shamans that we could have also brought.
But fundamentally Glauber, eh?
And this 19th-century edition, which is going to be
important because it's going to be the source, the
reference source for many of the novels, for many of the...
Hey authors who are going to use this year a thousand.
It is, therefore, you see, a question of,
uh, uh, editing sources and a question of
reflecting on what happens when defending
the year 1000 or not defending the year 1000.
The defenders of the year 1000.
They're not very interested in the data, they're not
very interested in the evidence. They're more interested
in their emotions, in their opinions, right? No.
In other words, it would be in the same direction, right?
There is a very interesting text about the year 1000.
Huh, what is it?
It's by Jules Ray, who becomes Julio Rey
in Spain.
This text, uh, is originally in French and
is translated in France itself.
in Spanish
and it is published in Spain.
This text about the year 1000 is linked to a collection.
Here you have both of them, huh?
Julio Reis.
Can you see it?
It's the same book, right? It's linked to the Library of Wonders.
The Library of Wonders is also one of the many libraries
Oh, uh, uh,
Publishing companies that emerged in the 19th century for dissemination.
Is there disclosure?
Many of these works circulated widely because
there was dissemination, because there was
an audience, and that audience was going to
demand the library, right? The Library of
Wonders had over 200 works and lasted from
the 19th century until the 1930s.
Did the driver get fed up?
No? Is that the one with jazzed up
the Luis phase of the publishing
house's promoter, huh?
Are they going to be the ones to launch this library
that wanted to disseminate different wonderful topics, huh?
There were astrological issues, etc., right?
And this
It is, uh, a point of friction with that
consensus that is desired of us.
Trying to build on the 19th century, right?
The only concern is, uh, a concern about the
evidence of the documents, etc., right?
There is a concern for the dissemination
of the wonderful, the magical, and so on.
Sharpton was very successful; he was a man who was
involved in various publishing projects.
Well, this Library of Wonders is
definitely worth studying.
The book we are going to focus on is this book
by a friar who is an intellectual.
An academic from College Hart was in the School
of Advanced Studies, uh, made his career as a
great, uh, researcher of different subjects,
etc. Uh, look, the collection that is blue in France
It's red in Spain, huh?
Daniel Cerezo launched his own library of
wonders. Here in this age it is 1885,886,
the Third French Republic and.
Alfonso
13, the.
The political friction in both
places is significant, huh.
And we have.
The Spanish king in question is none other than Cecilio
Navarro. As I said, this Library of Wonders was translated
many times in France because there were many Spanish
exiles who did the translations, and then from there it
was disseminated to other parts of Spain where this
library was created, as well as to Latin America and
Italy. So we can say that there is a central source and
receiving peripheries in different places,
because, for example, Spain was interested, huh?
We don't know about this idea from the 10th century, when
it was solely a French issue, but it is true that there are different ones.
For example, Ortega did a work, his
thesis on millenarianism, right?
Are there other Catalan authors who reflected
many of Glauber's ideas and those of the year 1000
in Spanish historiography of the 19th century?
In other words, well, a topic that isn't necessarily
Spanish, was already of interest in this 19th century.
What we have certified as geographical colonization, year one thousand,
historiographical colonization.
Well, here is Cecilio Navarro, who is, etc. I think
it's not very important, and these are the different
contexts of production, reception, the birth
of the audience, in short, right?
A peripheral audience for a central issue, isn't that right?
These are also issues that we can
already start looking at, right?
French as a language of knowledge and Spanish as a language of translation.
So, historiographical colonization is doing well at this point, huh?
The third example is the historical novel, right?
Have I focused on a work that I have studied a
little, which is, uh, The Page of Don Enrique, the mourner, uh?
Well, here's the whole issue of Romanticism, the press,
the novel, liberalism, but also, mmm, in this 19th-century
historical novel, uh, great authors.
That's the case.
Not Larra's?
And here I want to pause on a point that I think is also important, eh?
There are many authors of historical novels in the 19th century who are not
considered.
This is not the case with Larra.
He is not the inventor of the new journalism of a different way
of writing, as we can understand Umbral without understanding,
without resorting to Larra, for example.
And all this that has been called the new Spanish journalism,
column writing, the special relationship of Spanish
column writing and the press with thought, huh?
Hmm.
But I want to make a case for those authors who
are not Larra and who are not well known and
who are ultimately authors in search of an audience.
Many of the novels were published in pieces in the press, etc.
That is to say, there are many novelists who are neither
politicians nor important people, but who exist nonetheless.
And that has also led to a great deal of undervaluing of the
historical novel from a narrative point of view, and so on.
Recently, Professor Antonio Huertas sent me
two novels about the Camino de Santiago, written
by two authors seeking authorship, seeking
recognition, seeking an audience with
self-published works, etc. I think that this
also has to be included in the study of the themes,
that is, the denigrated authors, the despised
authors, the authors who supposedly have a bad
idea, eh? There is a consensual bad idea about them.
Okay, this is the case.
That is not the case.
Of course, from Larra, where we see they are, right?
There are central themes in today's historiography.
For example, the issue of the reconquest, which is central
to many historians today, was already present in the 19th
century without any problem, like many other things, and
you will continue to see this throughout the day.
Finally, animal trials, animal trials, is
something that falls somewhere between
the real and the marvelous, isn't it?
Where there is also an important issue, which is
the displacement of the subject of the narrative. Right?
Uh, no, it's not necessarily humans, but all kinds of animals.
We have some there, huh?
There are different ones.
You mention the 19th century is when this topic really took hold, right?
With visits, some documentation, etc.
But it's included too, eh, eh?
The historiographical consensus tells us that the truth is not being sought, etc.
The truth is not being sought, emotion is being sought, impact is being sought, the
audience is being sought.
It's not a very sensationalist topic.
Well, one pig hanged, three pigs tortured, one pig burned.
Well, pigs lived alongside people a lot in the Middle Ages.
But hey, locust plagues.
In the end,
Uh, uh, Evans is perhaps the author.
Hey, Central. Hey?
In all of that, a rooster's judgment.
So, here are some of the authors,
but as I said, fundamentally this
book by Evans, is the fundamental one.
Huh? With
It has that appendix, uh, documentary where he talks about
the places he goes to in order to prove these judgments.
Are there many?
strange places or documents, etc., right?
But the truth is, it's a topic that's circulating
and it's still an image, right?
Et cetera. Well, we're not going to get into those issues.
In short.
To wrap things up, huh?
The story of the 19th century, huh?
Can we understand it in another way, and
not necessarily from the consensus they impose on us?
Or what have historians constructed,
at least in this field in which I live,
in the sense that it is an era mmm, linked
only to the documentary and to history
as a science, right?
Do we have to consider that there's a
story connected to society, right?
We must consider that post-truth is transversal to
the different ways of doing history, whether academic
or not, post-truth or emotion, opinion, sensationalism,
etc. And where non-professional historians,
novelists, whoever wants to, are just as important as professionals.
And that leads us to break that consensus and also leads
us to better understand current historiography.
Current philosophy, as I said before, José Javier Esparza was
talking the other day about the historians' quarrel. Right?
He is an intelligent man and knows how to identify problems.
The audience
who consumes more historical novels,
books by Esparza, Roca, Barea or academic books.
Which side is the audience on?
Which side is he on?
The audiences of the media that
collect the
discussions and debates of historians.
Yesterday, for example, the digital journalist, uh,
A real one.
Fernando Paz, as disgraceful as he is, was talking about
war issues with the Falangist Eduardo García Serrano, weren't they?
Et cetera, right?
That has an audience, and the audience follows it.
Eh, eh,
I say Fernando Paz is unacceptable because they know
he dabbles in Holocaust denial, etc. And for me,
that's a red line that makes him unacceptable.
But it has an audience.
There are two blocks.
Today, that consensus does not necessarily exist, or if there
is a consensus, they want us to explain it from both
sides, from amateurs and from professionals.
And we can easily apply that to the 19th century as well.
Well, thank you very much Israel
for your, for your lecture.
I think these are very broad aspects
that could open up multiple, excuse
me, multiple debates, and also
thank you for adhering to
the proposed time, eh?
If anyone has any questions, both from the room and
from the participants who are following us from Teams, okay?
Would now be the time to move on to Professor
Martin? Well, uh, I have a question, or
rather, I reflect, but when you were
commenting on that audience, uh, we would
have to study or analyze not only the audience,
not only the format, because something
that the novel, the historical novel,
specifically the contemporary one, has
is that it tells the story of one of the most,
the best known and most popular, because
in Spain they have already had some.
In some places the novel is very, very conservative
and often it is a novel about the historian's novel.
Historians who publish historical novels
on the one hand, who publish historical
essays on the other, and who conduct research
on a historical period on the other.
On one hand they bring out the novel, on the other
hand, they bring out the essay and even authors
in a form of historical distortion.
I'm thinking, for example, of Eslava Galán, who has a doctorate in medieval
history.
I actually think so.
Yes, if I remember correctly, the thesis regarding
Poliética and Calvo Poyato, which is also and which
they publish or have, would be recognizable in
two lines in their production.
On the one hand, there's the one published under their own names
by the author Calvo Poyato, the author Eslava Galán, which
would be a novel, a historical novel, because it tries to be faithful, right?
Based on more or less exhaustive documentation, on
a recognized bibliography, faithful to the facts,
but then also a handsome Slavic man who is Nicholas
Wilcox and a bald Poyato who is Peter Harris and who
publish in search of another audience.
And in this case, I think it's a majority audience
and a best-selling novel, a novel about Templars,
Grails, Cathars, sacred bloodlines, etc.,
etc. I mean, that audience, right?
Or the search for a mass of readers
who prefer mysteries surrounding
history, history itself, means
that authors with historical
training often duplicate their
work in two different genres. Hmm.
I don't know if it's a question or an observation, but I think it's
interesting to reflect on what audience is being sought, who is
seeking it when it's the historian, it's the search.
If the historian, eh, is when he's a writer, eh?
Because there are many medievalists, for example, who publish novels, historical
novels.
How they act, etc.
Yes. Um, also, uh, speaking of, for
example, this in the 19th century, right?
Uh. Not López Soler.
That man also has several other aliases. Right?
Huh? And it has an audience, huh?
He's looking for an audience too, huh?
Compared to what you say about contemporary authors, huh?
That's an important question, isn't it?
And also being, uh, a, uh, a respect, right?
For example, all those authors you mentioned... mmm, I...
I respect them, that's not the right word.
So, they're people with extensive knowledge, right?
Just like Esparza, for example.
This is not the case for De Paz.
I insist, for a certain reason, right?
But of course, indeed, they use the same materials
for different things, but that's why it works so well.
There's one aspect we never analyzed either, which
you did, and that's the commercial aspect. Right?
There's a business issue here.
Hmm. Many of these texts, etc.,
are considered the ultimate goal in commerce.
Like, like, of fundamental importance. Right?
And that also seems important to me, mmm, for analyzing this type of work.
Of course, it's not the same if you create a work in search of
an audience, a work that you're going to sell, as if
you create a monograph, etc. An essay, right?
Anyway, for example, Eslava Galán should do a rehearsal.
The novel is a man of great
dimension, isn't it?
Eh of audience.
This will become something that...
Is it becoming more common?
We don't know.
It is necessary that there be a disclosure that.
That there be a connection between
academics and society.
Huh? And that connection is possible without the intermediation
of capitalism, without selling, without trade.
That's important.
But we also find it in the 19th century.
Isn't everything about all these works, everything
we're talking about, huh? How can we not understand it?
This collection we've been talking about is the Library of Wonders, right?
The sales figures are incredibly significant, aren't they?
Uh, with a very reasonable price. Right?
They were drawing things, huh?
They were of interest.
What does that mean?
That there is an audience, that there is a.
There is interest, uh, someone
who wants, uh, to read this.
Another question is why, for example, in the 19th century.
Are we interested in translating a text like this one, or others from that
Library of Wonders?
How are we building audiences?
Why are there these interests?
There is another audience that is created in the historical novel,
which is, therefore, from the press, from enlightened people and elites.
I don't know, it's also a reflection, but I think that, ultimately, where is all
this leading us?
The need to include the audience
as part.
Not from the investigation?
Ah, precisely Professor Carlos Mata, who
congratulates you on the presentation.
I was.
I was just mentioning it before you said it.
I didn't say that.
In the case of the success of current historical
novels, good, bad or worse, the marketing factor is
fundamental, the publishing promotion, marketing
are, uh, weighty elements that are there when it comes
to approaching, disseminating and also generating.
And it's curious because they generate, uh mmm
for the other side of the debate they don't
generate states of opinion regarding myths,
legends, and nationalisms also in many, in many cases.
But with your permission, we'll leave
it here, because we have our little
raisin now, otherwise we won't be
delayed and we'll continue in 15, 15,
20 minutes with communications table number one.
Many thanks to everyone who is following us both via
streaming and to the other speakers who are online and will be in 15 minutes.
We'll see you all again. Thank you so much.