Like Delgado, Esteso is cited briefly in the Enciclopedia Universal Ilustrada: 22, 909; and Apéndice: 4, 1354. In his Memorias Palau recalls a visit with the popular humorist in 1921 in a brief paragraph (p. 399).

See Palau's confusing double -but not joint- attribution cited in the previous paragraph.

Esteso is listed as author by Beltrán (pp. 148-49). The copy of the book that I have seen was obtained on interlibrary loan from the University of Illinois and is catalogued under the name of Luis Esteso. In the list of Esteso's publications in the Enciclopedia Ilustrada Universal (Apéndice: 4, 1354) the Libros is not included.

See the description of this political satire by Uribe-Echevarría, pp. 83-85.

Drake has stated that «The one serious gap in Quixote criticism is the time-span 1790-1895» (p. 120). He is essentially correct, although the evidence adduced in this essay suggests that the pre-1790 period is not, nearly as well covered by Cherchi (who never mentions Delgado, Centeno, Gatell, or others cited above) as Drake assumes. Rather, as Meregalli states, while there exists at least adequate coverage of Cervantine studies in eighteenth-century England, France, Germany, Italy, and Holland, the same is by no means true of Spain (pp. 187-88).

The prominence given by Delgado here to this Academy may help explain Centeno's satiric reference to it in his criticism of the Adiciones (cited in the first section of this essay).

A precedent for -though probably not a direct influence on, or even an inspiration for- Delgado's fiction about Cide Hamete is found in the preface to the Suite nouvelle. This preface, a short story in its own right, explains how Sansón Carrasco's investigative reporting enabled him to send detailed information about Don Quijote to his Moorish friend Benengeli in Salamanca and how the later wrote and had published the two parts on Don Quijote. The pastoral and other exploits of Don Quijote (who did not die, as mistakenly reported earlier) and Sancho Panza were also written but remained in manuscript form when Benengeli was forced to leave Spain for religious reasons. A Christian named Aranda, captive in Africa, came across the decades-old manuscript and after a long series of adventures of his own managed to have the work published. See Asensio, pp. 207-25. A useful and interesting addition to Cervantine studies would be a critical history of the imaginative accounts of how Don Quijote came to be written: Cervantes' version, this preface and Delgado's essay, modern versions of Cervantes' inspiration or of how Don Quijote or Sancho may ultimately be responsible for the work.

I want to express my appreciation to Mr. Kenneth A. Lohf, Librarian for Rare Books and Manuscripts at the Butler library of Columbia University for permission to reproduce this engraving, and to Dian Fox who secured the copy for me. I must also express my thanks to Harold Jones, Catherine Swietlicki, and Vern Williamsen, who read an early draft of this essay and offered valuable suggestions for improvement.

See respectively: Wayne C. Booth, The Rhetoric of Fiction (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1961); Robert Alter, Partial Magic: The Novel as a Self-Conscious Genre (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press 1975); Linda Hutcheon, Narcissistic Narrative: The Metafictional Paradox (New York: Methuen 1984).

Roland Barthes, S/Z. trans. Richard Miller (London: Jonathan Cape, 1975), 76: Character and Discourse.