The advance of historical studies in this period, especially in the sixteenth century, was nothing short of remarkable. For the first time history won a right to be considered apart from polite literature. Two novelties marked the era, one of them relative to the content of history, and the other concerning the methods of investigation and composition. Formerly history had reduced itself to little more than the external political narrative, dealing with wars, kings, and heroes, being more rhetorical in form than scientific. The new sense of content was represented principally by the philosopher Luis Vives and by the historian Páez de Castro, one-time chronicler of Charles I. Vives gave his opinion that history should deal with all the manifestations of social life. Páez de Castro stands forth, however, as the man who most clearly expressed the new ideas. According to him the history of a land should include the study of its geography, of the languages of its peoples, of the dress, laws, religions, social institutions, general customs, literature, arts, sciences, and even the aspects of nature of the land in so far as these things affected the actions of men. Páez de Castro was also a follower of Pérez de Guzmán and Hernando del Pulgar in his appreciation of the psychological element in history. The most exacting methodologists of the present day do not require more than did Páez de Castro nearly four centuries ago. Incidentally, it becomes clear that the credit ordinarily assigned to Voltaire (1694-1778) and Hume (1711-1776) as innovators in this respect belongs rather to Spaniards of the sixteenth century. Vives and Páez de Castro were not alone in their concept of history. On the other hand they were not able to put their ideas into practice, and were not followed by the majority of the writers on methodology. Nevertheless, all were agreed that the education of the historian should be encyclopedic in character,—an ideal which necessarily involved a measurable attainment of the plan of Páez de Castro.
Zurita and Morales and the advance in historical investigation and criticism.
If these concepts as to historical content were not fully realized, those with regard to the methods of investigation and criticism found a worthy representation in the majority of the historians of the era. To be sure, some of the great writers, like Florián de Ocampo and Mariana, displayed too much credulity or a disposition to imagine events for which they lacked documentary proof. Furthermore, this was a thriving period of forgeries, when writers invented classical authors, chronicles, letters, and inscriptions with which to support their narratives. Still, the evil brought about the remedy; the necessity for criticism was so great that its application became customary. In addition, men sought documents, if only to disprove the forgeries, with the result that the employment of source material and the use of the sciences auxiliary to history were a factor in the works of the numerous great historians of the time. The highest representatives of the new sense of historical analysis were the official chroniclers of Charles I and Philip II. First in point of time was Florián de Ocampo, whose Crónica general (General chronicle) was published in 1543. While giving too free rein to the imagination, his Crónica had a fairly complete documental basis in some of its parts. Far superior was the Anales de Aragón, or Annals of Aragon (1562-1580), of Jerónimo Çurita, or Zurita, which in its use of archive material was the greatest historical work of the sixteenth century. Of equal rank with Zurita was Ambrosio de Morales, the continuer of Ocampo, whose Crónica was published in 1574-1575. Morales, who was a distinguished palæographist and archæologist, made a notable use of inscriptions, coins, manuscripts, ancient books, and other ancient evidences. While the influence of Gibbon (1737-1794) on historiography in these respects is not to be denied, it is only fair to point out the merits of his predecessors of the Spanish siglo de oro in precisely those qualities for which the great Englishman has won such signal fame.
The historian Mariana.
The bibliographer Nicolás Antonio.
Historians of the Americas.
The historian of this era who attained the greatest reputation, though far from equalling Vives and Páez de Castro on the one hand or Zurita and Morales on the other, was the Jesuit Mariana. In 1592-1595 he published his history of Spain in Latin (Historia de rebus Hispaniæ), which he brought out in Castilian in 1601 under the title Historia general de España (General history of Spain). This work, which is still one of the most widely read of all Spanish histories, was remarkable for its composition and style, in which respects it was superior to others of the period, though otherwise inferior to the best works of the time. It was intended to be popular, however, on which account it should not be judged too critically from the standpoint of technique. Mariana’s history was an external political narrative, from the Castilian point of view, of the events which had developed the national unity of Spain. His own bias, politically and otherwise, was only too apparent, besides which he displayed the faults of credulity and imagination already alluded to. Nevertheless, Mariana made use of manuscripts and the evidence of inscriptions and coins, though not to the same degree as Zurita, Morales, and others. His style was tinged with the Humanistic ideals of the period, being strongly influenced by Livy. Many other students of history or of the sciences auxiliary to history are deserving of recognition, and at least one of them demands mention, Nicolás Antonio, the greatest bibliographer of his time. In 1672 he published his Bibliotheca hispana (republished in 1788 as the Bibliotheca hispana nova, or Catalogue of new Spanish works) of all Spanish works since 1500, and in 1696 completed his Bibliotheca hispana vetus, or Catalogue of old Spanish works (published in 1788), of Spanish books, manuscript and printed, prior to the sixteenth century. Deserving of special notice was a remarkable group of historians of the Americas, such as Fernando Colón (Ferdinand Columbus), Fernández de Oviedo, López de Gómara, Bernal Díaz del Castillo, Bernabé Cobos, Gutiérrez de Santa Clara, Juan de Castellanos, Acosta, Garcilaso de la Vega, Herrera, Cieza de León, Zárate, Jerez, Dorantes de Carranza, Góngora, Hevía, León Pinelo, Mendieta, Pizarro, Sahagún, Suárez de Peralta, Alvarado, Torquemada, Solís, Cortés, Las Casas, Cervantes de Salazar, López de Velasco, the already cited Solórzano, Pérez de Ribas, Tello, Florencia, Vetancurt, and many others. The works of some of these men were written in Spain as official chronicles of the Indies, while those of others were prepared independently in the Americas. Religious history was abundantly produced, as also were books of travel, especially those based on the expeditions and discoveries in the Indies. In all of the historical production of the era, not merely in the work of Mariana, the influence of classical models was marked.
The conquest of the Americas and resultant Spanish achievements in natural science, geography, and cartography.
If the output of Spaniards in the domain of the natural sciences was not so great as in the realm of philosophy, jurisprudence, and history, it was nevertheless distinctively original in character,—necessarily so, since the discovery of new lands and new routes, to say nothing of the effects of continuous warring, not only invited investigation, but also made it imperative, in order to overcome hitherto unknown difficulties. In dealing with the Americas a practice was made of gathering geographical data which for its completeness has scarcely ever been surpassed. Explorers were required by law to make the most detailed observations as to distances, general geographical features, character of the soil, products, animals, and peoples, with a view to the collection and the study of their reports at the Casa de Contratación, for which purpose the post of cosmographical chronicler of the Indies was created. Equal amplitude of data was also to be found in books of travel. To enumerate the contributors to geographical knowledge it would be necessary to name the hundreds of Spanish voyages and explorations in the new world of which accounts were written by their leaders or by friars accompanying the expeditions. A noteworthy compendium of these reports has recently been published, although it was compiled in the sixteenth century, the Geografía y descripción universal de las Indias (Geography and general description of the Indies) for the years 1571 to 1574 by Juan López de Velasco. Something of a like nature was achieved for the peninsula itself in the reign of Philip II. As was inevitable, Spaniards were prominent in cartography. Aside from the men who accompanied the expeditions in the new world, the most famous cartographers of the time were those of the Casa de Contratación, many of whom made contributions to cartographical science, as well as additions to the mapping of the world. One interesting instance was the use of maps with equi-distant polar projections years before Mercator in 1569 first employed this method, which was henceforth to bear his name. Spanish innovators have not received the credit they deserve, principally because their results were in many cases deliberately kept secret by the Spanish government, which wished to retain a monopoly of the information, as well as of the trade, of the new world. Spanish achievements, it will be observed, were designed to meet practical ends, rather than to promote universal knowledge,—unfortunately for the fame of the individuals engaged in scientific production.
Similarly, Spanish achievements in the mathematical and physical sciences.