centre of the novel: ‘Chivalry had to focus on the defence of Christendom in order to justify its existence. Romance had to provide an ideal to inspire Christian chivalric deeds. As such, magic was condemned and generally avoided, as well as the concept of the knight-errant, who is an adventure seeker, in favour of a Christian knight in the fashion of a crusader’ (83). The knights were now Christian knights who only fought the enemies of Christendom and were now chastely married: ‘[Love] was a theme that was expected by the audience familiar with the cycle and the genre. As a theme in Florisando, love appears rarely in comparison with religion and chivalry. Florisando has no chivalric adventures motivated by love’ (71). Not surprisingly, Florisando and Lisuarte were publishing failures. Although Lisuarte cast itself as the continuation of Florisando, no continuations were made of it and it was never published again. Feliciano de Silva did not make the same mistake. He also went back to Montalvo’s originals, but developed them in ways that were familiar to the reading public, thus ensuring their success. He wrote all but one of the romances that comprise the orthodox branch of the Amad ıs cycle, and was probably the most prolific continuator of texts in the sixteenth century (he also wrote a continuation of Celestina). Such was his fame that he was the first author of romances to be satirized by Cervantes in Don Quijote. Crucially, Cervantes does not mention once P aez de Ribera or D ıaz. He knew full well to whom the romances of chivalry owed their fame and success. This is a book that anyone interested in Don Quijote and the romances of chivalry ought to read. It puts the latter in context, shows how cycles were formed and developed, and underlines their amazing publishing success in the sixteenth century: ‘By the late sixteenth century over half a million copies of Amad ıs and its sequels had been printed in Europe, either in Spanish or in its translations’ (39). Rewritings, Sequels and Cycles occasionally betrays its origins as a doctoral thesis with at time too much repetition and summing up, and the occasional infelicity of style: ‘a representation of Earth, the planets, and the stars, which represents...’ (104); ‘Amad ıs de Grecia established a bellicose intertextuality ... Amad ıs de Grecia established a symbolic...’ (105), as well as simple errata which should have been picked up during proof correction: ‘The father-son combat serves portrays...’ (106). Nonetheless, this is a wellresearched book that reveals fascinating and often overlooked aspects of the romances of chivalry. One can see why Cervantes was beguiled by them.

中文翻译：

---

身体紊乱：Baroja 和 Blasco Ibáñez 的性别和退化

小说的中心：“骑士精神必须专注于捍卫基督教世界，以证明其存在的正当性。浪漫必须提供一种理想来激发基督徒的骑士精神。因此，魔法被谴责并普遍被避免，以及游侠骑士的概念，他是一个冒险的探索者，以十字军的方式支持基督教骑士'（83）。骑士们现在是基督教骑士，他们只与基督教世界的敌人作战，现在已经贞洁地结婚了：“[爱]是熟悉循环和流派的观众所期待的主题。作为 Florisando 的主题，与宗教和骑士精神相比，爱情很少出现。Florisando 没有以爱为动力的骑士冒险'（71）。毫不奇怪，Florisando 和 Lisuarte 出版失败。尽管 Lisuarte 将自己塑造为 Florisando 的续集，但没有续集，并且再也没有出版过。Feliciano de Silva 没有犯同样的错误。他还回到了蒙塔尔沃的原著，但以读者熟悉的方式对其进行了发展，从而确保了他们的成功。他写了几乎所有包含阿玛德循环正统分支的浪漫故事，并且可能是 16 世纪文本最多产的延续者（他还写了塞莱斯蒂娜的延续）。由于他的名气，他是第一个在唐吉诃德被塞万提斯讽刺的浪漫主义作家。至关重要的是，塞万提斯没有提到 P aez de Ribera 或 Dıaz。他很清楚骑士的浪漫故事归功于谁的名声和成功。这是一本任何对唐吉诃德和骑士传奇感兴趣的人都应该阅读的书。它将后者置于上下文中，展示了循环是如何形成和发展的，并强调了他们在 16 世纪取得惊人的出版成功：“到 16 世纪后期，Amad 及其续集已在欧洲印刷了超过 50 万册，要么西班牙语或其翻译版本”（39）。重写、续集和周期偶尔会背叛其作为博士论文的起源，有时会出现过多的重复和总结，以及偶尔的风格不当：“地球、行星和恒星的代表，代表……”（ 104); 'Amad ıs de Grecia 建立了一个好战的互文性...... Amad ıs de Grecia 建立了一个象征性的......'（105），以及在校对过程中本应采用的简单勘误表：“父子战斗服务描绘......”（106）。尽管如此，这是一本经过充分研究的书，它揭示了骑士浪漫史中引人入胜但经常被忽视的方面。可以看出为什么塞万提斯被他们迷惑了。