Social vanity.
Survivals of medievalism among the nobles.
The hierarchy of the nobility was definitely established in this period. At the top, representing the medieval ricoshombres, were the grandees (Grandes) and the “titles” (Títulos). The principal difference between the two was that the former were privileged to remain covered in the presence of the king and to be called “cousins” of the monarch, while those of the second grade might only be called “relatives,”—empty honors, which were much esteemed, however, as symbolic of rank. These groups monopolized all titles such as marquis, duke, count, and prince. Below them were the caballeros and the hidalgos. The word hidalgos was employed to designate those nobles of inferior rank without fortune, lands, jurisdiction, or high public office. The desire for the noble rank of hidalgo and the vanity marked by the devising of family shields became a national disease, and resulted in fact in the increase of the hidalgo class. The people of Guipúzcoa claimed that they were all hidalgos, and received the royal recognition of their pretension. Measures were taken to check this dangerous exemplification of social pride, but on the other hand the treasury found the sale of rights of hidalguía a profitable source of income. In 1541 there were less than 800,000 taxpayers in Castile, but over 100,000 hidalgos. The nobles did not at once forget their medieval practices of duelling, private war, plotting, and violence. There were instances of these throughout the era, and in Aragon and Majorca they were almost continuous. Nevertheless, the situation did not become so serious as it had been in the past; it merely represented the deeply rooted force of noble tradition, which objected to any submission to discipline. Both the hierarchy of the nobility, with all its incidents of broad estates, jurisdictions, class pride, and vanity, and the irresponsible practices of the nobles passed over into the Americas.
Advance of the plebeian classes through the rise of the merchants and the letrados.
While there were many different categories of free Christian society the essential grades were those of nobles (or members of the clergy) and plebeians. There were many rich merchants of the middle class who aped the nobility in entailing their estates and in luxurious display, and there were learned men who received distinguished honors or exemptions from duties to the state, but in social prestige they could not compare with the lowest hidalgo. Many of them became noble by royal favor, and especially was this way open to the learned class of the letrados. These men provided lawyers and administrative officers for the state, and, as such, occupied positions which put them on a level, at least in authority, with the nobles. The advance of the merchants and the letrados represented a gain for the plebeian class as a whole, for any free Christian might get to be one or the other and even become ennobled. The economic decline of Spain in the seventeenth century was a severe blow to the merchants, while the letrados were unpopular with nobles and plebeians alike; nevertheless, thoughtful men agreed that the regeneration of the country must come from these two elements.
Improvement in the legal condition of the masses.
The masses were poor, as always, but their legal condition, except in Aragon, had been improved. There were many social wars in Aragon throughout the period, but the serfs, unable to act together, could not overcome their oppressors. Something was done by the kings through the incorporation into the crown of seigniorial estates where abuses were most pronounced. The same state of chronic warfare existed in Catalonia, where the rural population, though now freed from serfdom, was still subject to certain seigniorial rights. By the end of the period the victory of the plebeians was clear, and the ties which bound them to the lords were loosened. The social aspects of the civil wars in Castile, Valencia, and Majorca at the outset of the reign of Charles I have already been referred to. These revolts failed, and there were no similar great uprisings of the Christian masses in these regions, but the tendency of the nobility to go to court and the expulsion of the Moriscos were to operate to break down the survivals of seigniorial authority.
Slavery.
The gypsies.
Although objections were raised to the enslavement of the Indians in the Americas, the institution of slavery itself was generally recognized; even charitable and religious establishments possessed slaves. Moslem prisoners and negroes (acquired through war or purchase), together with their children, made up the bulk of this class, although there were some slaves of white race. Conversion to Christianity did not procure emancipation, but the slaves were allowed to earn something for themselves with which to purchase their freedom. Certain restrictions—such, for example, as the prohibition against their living in quarters inhabited by newly converted Christians, or against their entering the guilds—were placed upon them once they had become free. Only a little higher in status than the slaves were the Egipcianos, or gypsies. About the middle of the fifteenth century they had entered Spain for the first time by way of Catalonia, and, thenceforth, groups of them wandered about the peninsula, stealing and telling fortunes for a living, and having a government of their own. A law of 1499 required them to settle down in towns and ply honest trades on pain of expulsion from Spain or of enslavement, but the gypsies neither left Spain nor abandoned their nomadic ways, and they were a continual problem to the kings of the House of Austria. Various royal orders provided that they must take up an occupation, although their choice was virtually limited by law to the cultivation of the soil; they were not to live in the smaller villages, were forbidden to use their native language, dress, or names, or to employ their customs in marriage and other matters, and were prohibited from dwelling in a separate quarter of their own. Fear lest the Christian population become contaminated by gypsy superstitions and a regard for public security were the guiding motives for this legislation. Severe penalties were attached, but the evil was not eradicated; similar laws had to be enacted as late as the eighteenth century.