Roused by such suggestions, however, Father Isla amused himself with making a translation of Gil Blas, adding to it a long and not successful continuation,[336] and declaring, without ceremony or proof, that it was the work of an Andalusian advocate, who gave his manuscript to Le Sage, when Le Sage was in Spain, either as a secretary of the French embassy, or as a friend of the French ambassador. But all this seems to be without any foundation, for the manuscript has never been produced; the advocate has never been named; and Le Sage was never in Spain. Still, the Spanish claim has not been abandoned. On the contrary, Llorente, in two ingenious and learned works on the subject, one in French and the other in Spanish, but both printed in 1822, reasserts it, with great earnestness, resting his proofs on internal evidence, and insisting that Gil Blas is certainly of Spanish origin, and that it is probably the work, not indeed of Father Isla’s Andalusian advocate, but of Solís, the historian;--a suggestion, for which Llorente produces no better reason, than that nobody else of the period to which he assigns the Gil Blas was able, in his judgment, to write such a romance.[337] [336] Another continuation of Gil Blas, less happy even than that of Father Isla, appeared, in 2 tom. 8vo, at Madrid, in 1792, entitled “Genealogia de Gil Blas, Continuacion de la Vida de este famoso Sujeto, por su Hijo Don Alfonso Blas de Liria.” Its author was Don Bernardo Maria de Calzada, a person who, a little earlier, had translated much from the French. (Sempere, Biblioteca, Tom. VI. p. 231.) This work, too, the author declared to be a translation, and, like Isla, set forth on his title-page that it was “restored to the language in which it was originally written.” But the whole is a worthless fiction, title-page and all, though the attempt to make out for Gil Blas a clear and noble genealogy on the side of his mother must be admitted to be a truly Spanish fancy. (See Libros III. y IV.) The story is unfinished.