Joan Tartas (; ; ; also erroneously known as Ivan Tartas) was a Souletin clergyman and writer in the Basque language, probably born in 1610. His date of death is unknown.
Two of his religious works have survived: Onsa hilceco bidia (1666) and Arima penitentaren occupatione devotaq (1672). These works belong to the corpus of early Basque religious literature and reflect the pastoral and devotional concerns of the clergy in the Basque Country during the 17th century.
Documentary information about his life is scarce and sometimes contradictory. According to Luis Villasante, Tartas may have been born between 1610 and 1612 into a family of prosperous farmers, and he is said to have begun his early studies with the Clerics Regular of Saint Paul in Lescar in 1624.
It has also been suggested that Sanz de Tartas, who served as proofreader for the 1565 New Testament translation by Joannes Leizarraga, may have been his great-uncle.
was published in 1666 and is the earliest surviving work by Joan Tartas, as well as the most studied and widely known. Because a considerable period elapsed between the initial (1633) and final (1641) ecclesiastical approvals, scholars have suggested that the author may have encountered difficulties in obtaining permission to publish the book. These difficulties may have stemmed from the perceived severity of some of the examples usedâÂÂseveral of which refer to French monarchsâÂÂor from the extensive use of quotations from Latin and pagan authors, toward whom the author occasionally expresses admiration.
The work is an example of ascetic literature and focuses on the need to prepare properly for death. According to the author, a good life is inseparable from a good death. Tartas summarizes this idea in the following passage:
To support his argument, Tartas cites a wide range of sources, including classical authors such as Aristotle and Seneca, the Bible, and Christian writers such as Saint Augustine. The work has often been compared to Gero by Pedro Agerre Axular, as both texts are written in prose, deal with ascetic themes, and display essay-like characteristics, including the frequent use of quotations. However, TartasâÂÂs style has been described as less systematic and more limited in rhetorical resources. The book is generally classified as part of the European tradition of religious manuals concerned with individual salvation.
According to Tartas himself, the work is organized into four main chapters:
The book concludes with an appendix containing prayers in Basque, the commandments of God and of the Catholic Church, litanies to the Virgin Mary, and several verses dedicated to the author by readers, including Juan de Baguaria, Bonnecase, and P. Darhetz.
Arima penitentaren occupatione devotaq was published in Orthez by the townâÂÂs Royal Printer. The edition contains numerous spelling errors and displays a markedly French-influenced orthography, a feature that scholars have sometimes attributed to the printerâÂÂs intervention. As indicated by its title, the work consists of reflections on Christian devotional practicesâÂÂparticularly prayer, fasting, and almsgivingâÂÂwith each theme treated in a separate section.
The work concludes with three poems dedicated to the author in Latin, French, and Basque; the Basque poem was written by Juan de Baguaria.
Tartas utilised the Basque language primarily as a vehicle for pastoral instruction, employing it to disseminate the doctrines of the Catholic Church rather than as an aesthetic or literary medium. Nevertheless, writers such as Pedro Agerre Axular and Tartas himself developed a recognizable prose style with distinctive personal traits. TartasâÂÂs writing, for example, is often characterized by a rapid rhythm and a direct tone, features that have led scholars to consider his work worthy of continued study. Critics generally regard his first work, Onsa hilceco bidia, more favorably than his second, Arima penitentaren occupatione devotaq, which has sometimes been described as difficult to read because of its orthographic inconsistencies and strong French influence in spelling.
TartasâÂÂs language has been described as relatively unpolished but distinctive and inclined toward wordplay. According to the Carmelite philologist Santi Onaindia, the originality of TartasâÂÂs writing lies partly in its unusual and somewhat chaotic character.
The criticisms made by Koldo Mitxelena and Father Luis Villasante in their respective studies of Basque literature have been particularly influential. These scholars highlight a contrast that they consider central to TartasâÂÂs originality.
On the one hand, Tartas appears as a âÂÂserious,â âÂÂlearned,â and âÂÂeruditeâ author. He was a skilled translator, especially from Spanish, French, and Latin into Basque. Mitxelena considered TartasâÂÂs erudition to be greater than that of Axular, and noted that some passagesâÂÂparticularly those recounting the lives of monarchsâÂÂrecall the style of Father Nieremberg. Research by Darricarrére has suggested that these historical anecdotes may have contributed to difficulties with ecclesiastical censorship, possibly explaining the nine-year interval between the earliest and final approvals of Onsa hilceco bidia.
On the other hand, TartasâÂÂs mode of expression has sometimes been described as âÂÂvulgar,â âÂÂcoarse,â or âÂÂentertaining,â owing to his use of colloquial expressions, direct language, and vivid examples. His punctuation is often inconsistent, and his prose frequently follows a spontaneous and oral style. For modern scholars, however, this spontaneity and closeness to spoken language constitute an important element of the value and originality of his work.
According to literary analyses, Tartas structures his prose by alternating two types of discourse:
TartasâÂÂs style shows affinities with the oral tradition and with the rhetoric of sermons. Although it lacks the stylistic refinement often attributed to Axular, rector of Sare, it displays a distinctive narrative rhythm. This dynamic quality of his prose has been regarded as one of the principal merits of his writing and as a feature that distinguishes it from the works of many of his contemporaries.
Koldo Mitxelena initially regarded Tartas as the first author to write in the Souletin dialect. In contrast, although Arnaud Oihenart was a native of Soule, he wrote his works primarily in the Labourd dialect and Low Navarrese dialect. Tartas himself commented on the mixed character of the language used in his works:
According to Piarres Lafitte, the Basque used by Tartas provides useful material for studying the features of the Souletin dialect, although it does not represent a completely pure form of it. Lafitte noted, for example, the absence of the vowel ü, as well as the influence of Labourdian, Low Navarrese, and the local variety spoken in Arue. Subsequently, Mitxelena revised his earlier assessment. Current scholarship generally holds that the variety used by Tartas most likely corresponds to the Amikuze subdialect within the Souletin dialect area.
During his lifetime, TartasâÂÂs two known works received notable praise from both French and Basque religious figures. In total, the two books contain nine commendatory textsâÂÂfive in verse and four in proseâÂÂan unusually large number for a writer working in the Basque language during the 17th century. These texts attest to the favorable reception of his writings within ecclesiastical circles at the time. Despite this early recognition, TartasâÂÂs works later fell into relative obscurity and were largely forgotten for several centuries. References to him remained rare until the 20th century, when scholarly studies by figures such as Patxi Altuna and Koldo Mitxelena renewed academic interest in his life and writings.
The following figures of that time wrote dedications or praises in his prefaces:
Approximate translation of Autorari, by Juan de Baguaria Cambloque, rector of Susmio:
In discussions of early Basque literature, Tartas is often considered in relation to the literary circle associated with SareâÂÂcommonly referred to as the âÂÂSchool of SaraâÂÂâÂÂand particularly to the work of Pedro Agerre Axular. According to Luis Villasante, cited by Xabier Kintana in his Historia de la literatura vasca, TartasâÂÂs work Onsa hilceco bidia required more than ten years to obtain the necessary ecclesiastical approvals. According to Kintana:
Nevertheless, Kintana argues that it would be inaccurate to interpret TartasâÂÂs work as the result of ignorance or lack of organization. His analysis suggests that the author deliberately prioritized narrative elements over doctrinal exposition, in contrast to Axular. Whereas AxularâÂÂs works are characterized by a careful balance between quotations and thesis, Tartas places greater emphasis on storytelling and illustrative examples. Kintana therefore suggests that the differences between the two authors reflect distinct literary choices rather than limitations in TartasâÂÂs abilities.
Scholars have also pointed to a possible implicit dialogue between Tartas and Axular. In the prologue to Gero, Axular writes:
Tartas appears to respond to this idea in the prologue to his own work, stating:
According to Kintana, these statements can be interpreted as indirect responses to one another, suggesting that Tartas was familiar with AxularâÂÂs work and did not fully share his perspective. While Axular sought to give equal importance to both content and formâÂÂcontributing to the refined and carefully structured character of his languageâÂÂTartas placed greater emphasis on the message conveyed by the text than on stylistic elaboration. As a result, his Basque is often described as less polished and more limited in rhetorical resources, but at the same time more natural and conversational in tone.