If Luis de Leon’s opponents expected to overwhelm him by the suddenness, vehemence, or volume of their attack, they must speedily have been disillusioned.  The mystic poet proved to be a formidable fighting-man.  Before very long it must have dawned upon the Inquisitionary deputies at Valladolid that they had caught a Tartar.  Unversed in the ways of the world, Luis de Leon came of a legal stock, and was thoroughly at home in a law-court.  A master of dialectics, he was always alert, always prompt to criticize the evidence, always ready to deal with every point as it arose, always prepared to furnish elaborate written or verbal explanations as to every detail concerning which the tribunal could harbour a reasonable doubt.  The official secretaries of the Court—­Celedon Gustin and the rest of them—­must have grown to dread Luis de Leon’s continual demands for sheets of paper on which to write his long, considered replies.  It would be idle to attempt to summarize the technical arguments advanced by each side in support of conflicting views on doctrinal or exegetical problems.  In this place, it will suffice to advert to points which help to illuminate the character of Luis de Leon, or to exemplify the attitude of the court towards him.

At the outset, as already stated, there seems to have existed no decided prejudice against Luis de Leon in the minds of his judges:  they apparently administered the existing system in a not illiberal spirit.  There are indications, however, that this position of relative impartiality was not maintained.  That the court became gradually biased against the accused seems to follow from the small but eloquent fact of its rejecting Luis de Leon’s petition that his University chair should not be declared vacant till the end of his trial.[72] It cannot be argued that the judges were concerned for the efficiency of the teaching in the University of Salamanca—­a matter in which they took no sort of interest.  The decision of the court in Luis de Leon’s case was in direct conflict with the ruling of the same court as regards Barrientos, another Salamancan professor who was in custody of the Valladolid Inquisition on May 20, 1572.[73] It was then settled that Barrientos should not be disturbed, and that no successor to him should be appointed so long as he was imprisoned.  Luis de Leon’s chair was declared vacant as soon as his normal tenure of four years had expired; the ordinary course of unquestioned renewal was not followed; and, to make matters worse, his implacable opponent, Bartolome de Medina, was appointed to succeed Luis de Leon in his chair.[74] For this appointment, no doubt, the University of Salamanca is entitled to claim such credit as is due.  But no such appointment would have been possible had the Valladolid Inquisitors been consistent.  What caused the court to be more severe to Luis de Leon than to his colleague Barrientos?