La Araucana

Lore & Background

The poem describes the initial phase of the Arauco War, which evolved from the Spanish conquest attempt of southern Chile. Ercilla was a participant in the conquest and based the story on his experiences, jotting down versified octaves on scraps of paper during lulls in fighting, later gathered and augmented into the epic. The poem is written in octava real, a difficult eight-line stanza of 11-syllable verses with a rhyme scheme abababcc, adapted from Italian in the 16th century. The work includes fantastical elements reminiscent of medieval chivalry, with influences from Orlando furioso by Ludovico Ariosto, as well as Classical sources like Virgil and Lucan. The narrator is a participant in the story, a new development for Spanish literature at the time. Ercilla's depiction of Araucanian leaders—Caupolicán, Lautaro, Colocolo, and Galvarino—has proved the most memorable, and the poem exalts the heroism of the vanquished, written by one of the victors. Key events include the capture and execution of Pedro de Valdivia, the death of Lautaro at the Battle of Mataquito, and the execution of Caupolicán after betrayal.

Reader's Guide

La Araucana is significant as one of the earliest works of literature from the New World, blending Classical and Renaissance motifs with contemporary events. Today, La Araucana is rarely read except by specialists and students, though it remains a subject of special attention in Chilean elementary education. Its legacy lies in its humanist sympathy for indigenous peoples and its elevation of the defeated Araucanians as champions, despite Ercilla's loyalty to the Spanish cause.

Did You Know?

• La Araucana was written by Alonso de Ercilla, who participated in the conquest and based the story on his experiences, jotting down versified octaves on scraps of paper during lulls in fighting.
• Miguel de Cervantes's Don Quixote spares La Araucana from flames, calling it 'one of the best examples of its genre.'
• Voltaire admired a speech in Canto II of La Araucana, though he criticized the poem as rambling and directionless.