A History of Spain / founded on the Historia de España y de la civilización española of Rafael Altamira

by Charles E. Chapman; Rafael Altamira

The family.

Among the social traits of the era may be noted a certain moral laxity. Two forms of marriage were recognized, that of bendición (blessing of the church), accompanied by a religious ceremony, and the wedding á yuras (under oath), by a simple contract between the parties concerned. A third form of union, similar to the latter but not recognized as lawful wedlock, was that of barraganía (concubinage). The essential conditions of barraganía were permanence and fidelity. Both parties were supposed to be single, although the custom often extended to include married men; in the latter case, but not in the former, the children were held to be illegitimate. Many clergymen entered into this relation, despite efforts to prevent the practice. Barraganía and the marriage á yuras have been considered to be a Christian imitation of Moslem marital customs. Divorce was allowed for serious cause. The father was recognized as the master of the family, although the wife and children gained certain financial and personal rights which had not formerly been accorded them. The bonds of family were so strong, however, that individuals who were free by law to emancipate themselves—for example, by marriage—often continued under the parental roof. Thus great family groups living in common were formed.

Advance in domesticity.

Other social customs.

As a result of the greater economic wealth, the comparative peace back from the frontier, and the development of the towns the manner of life underwent a rapid change, which may be summed up by saying that people began to live inside the house instead of out, giving more active play to the domestic instinct of the woman, which in its turn had a much needed softening effect upon the man. Houses now had hearths, although not always a chimney and as late as the twelfth century no panes of glass in the windows. Furniture reached a degree of luxury and comfort far in advance of what it had been since the Roman era. It was heavy and very sober in decoration at first, but increased in adornment later on. Beds were an object of luxury in the eleventh century; people slept on benches or on the floor. By the thirteenth century artisans and laborers usually had a bed, as also a table, two chairs, and a chest. Chairs, throughout the period, were low, and rarely had backs; those with both arms and a back were reserved for the master of the house. Floors, even in palaces, were usually bare of cover. Habits of cleanliness were not yet very much in evidence. Clothing was customarily worn until worn out, without being changed or washed. At table it was rare for the diners to have individual plates or napkins, and the fork was not yet known. Bones and refuse were left on the table, or thrown on the floor, and the use of water for any purpose other than for drinking was unusual. The custom of public baths had some vogue in the cities, however. Men still lived much in the open, but women habitually withdrew from public view. Crimes against women, from those which were more serious down to the comparatively mild offence of pulling a woman’s hair, were punished with extreme severity,—not that women enjoyed high esteem or even an equal consideration with men, for the supposed gallantry of the medieval period did not in fact exist. Men wore their hair long, and a long beard was considered as an indication of dignity,—so much so, that a heavy penalty was imposed on anybody who pulled or cut another’s beard. Amusement was provided by jugglers or by dancing and singing, especially on days of religious festivals, or holidays, and during the holding of fairs. Among the great people the French sport of the tourney was much in favor. From France, too, came feudal chivalry, imposing the ideals of valor, loyalty, and dignity (to the extent that nobody should doubt another’s nobility, his word, or his courage) on those professing it. This exaggerated sense of honor led to duelling, and comported ill with the real conduct of the nobles. Epidemics of leprosy and plagues (bubonic?) were frequent, resulting in the founding of hospitals and institutions of charity.

Political and administrative changes.

Fundamentally, León and Castile had much the same political organization as before, but the popular element, as represented in the villas and the Cortes, began to be a real political force, and the kings increased their strength at the expense of the nobles, although their struggle with the nobility as a class was not to result in complete royal victory for more than two centuries yet. The throne continued elective in theory, but the tendency was for it to become hereditary, although the question was not definitely settled at this time. The right of women to reign became recognized with the crowning of Berenguela. In administration many governmental districts were enlarged to include various counties, the whole being ruled by a governor appointed directly by the king, assisted by functionaries called merinos mayores,[20] who had charge of civil and criminal jurisdiction. An important reform was effected by removing the nobles from the post of the king’s representative in the counties and substituting officials called adelantados, whose authority at this time was more civil than military, and therefore less dangerous.[21] Still others exercised respectively political and military authority.

Beginnings of the Cortes.

Legislation.

For centuries the kings had been in the habit of holding councils of nobles or ecclesiastics, or both, although there was a tendency to exclude the churchmen. In 1137 a council of nobles at Nájera was called the Cortes. The popular element was first admitted in 1188, at a Cortes held in León,—possibly the first occasion in the history of Europe when representatives of the towns appeared in such an assembly. The first known instance in Castile occurred in 1250. For a number of years, León and Castile, though become a single kingdom, continued to have a separate Cortes. The kings called this body whenever they wished, although they often made promises (which they did not fulfil) to set regular intervals. None of the individuals called, whether nobles, ecclesiastics, or representatives of the villas (or towns), had the right to present themselves; that was left to the choice of the king, but the custom gradually became fixed that certain towns should have the privilege of being represented. Each member had one vote, but the number of representatives from the towns differed, without being subject to a general rule. The towns themselves chose who should represent them, but the methods of choice were various. The Cortes was allowed to make petitions to the king, each branch for itself, and to fix the sum of money that it would grant him. It had no true legislative functions, but the king sought its advice, or its approval for his laws, and its influence was such, that it was able to procure desired legislation. The king presided in person at the opening and closing sessions, and through officials of his own appointment at the other meetings. The king continued to be the principal legislative authority, and the law retained its former diversity and its fundamental basis of privilege; the variety even increased, with the introduction of the new social classes. The Fuero Juzgo, which was the common law, applied in but few respects. The kings did something in the way of producing greater juridical similarity, as by making dispositions of a general character at meetings of the Cortes, and by using certain municipal charters as types, while Ferdinand III commenced to draw up a uniform code, although he did not live to complete it.