The Worlds of Alfonso the Learned and James the Conqueror
Robert I. Burns, S.J., Ed. 
Chapter 7
Law and Politics:
Alfonso's Program of Political Reform

[150] Kings do not live by war alone. Conquest, and the affluent patronage in its wake, makes a feeble foundation for greatness. Prudent administration and fiscality cannot transform countries. Below the worlds of culture and proud war, away from international politics and commerce, each of our kings emplaced and struggled to maintain a domestic policy. In lands so expanded by recent war, and so unstable with opportunity and change, they really had no option to do otherwise. Somehow building on the past of their respective countries, and somehow using Roman Law as the principal science of the day, both kings had to refashion present institutional structures and reorient their peoples toward the very different future now opening before them, at once challenging and threatening. In this practical pursuit, both kings created codes of law monumental for their time. Both resolutely emplaced that law, to the extent that their more conservative elites allowed. Introducing new or reinforcing old values, attitudes, and presuppositions, these laws shaped, unified, and guided public life.

More than in the brave show of battle, the heady international affairs, or the brilliance of high culture, the most significant achievements and failures of each monarch should be sought here. In choosing Alfonso as our exemplar this time, we can preface our investigation with a review of his situation at home and abroad, since the domestic program affected and was affected by that larger frame. We can then consider the purpose and formation of his great law codes, and how they carried forward the Alfonsine program of political reform.

In any inquiry into politics and law in Alfonso's reign, royal policies are a basic concern; in this brief treatment general policies provide the primary pattern in a complex [151] weave. This study reveals three points concerning the policies of Alfonso. (1)   (1) An Alfonsine program existed, although some of its roots lie in the reign of Fernando III and some go back even further. (2) Alfonso was well acquainted with his father's program, and without doubt had a significant part in creating it while participating actively in Fernando's government. (3) Continuity existed from those points of origin into the second half of Alfonso's reign, when the course of events yielded results that in the short run were adverse to the program.

A reasonable starting point in considering the origins and course of the Alfonsine program is supplied by dynastic relationships, specifically those that produced the final union of Castile and León. Predicated upon the permanence of the tie sanctified by the church, matrimonial connections were intended to reinforce the security and well-being of the king and his kingdom, and to assure continuity in rule. This continuity and authority conferred by legal succession are fundamental ingredients in Alfonsine political thought. Reviewing the establishment of Castilian-Leonese dynastic relationships not only identifies Alfonso's place in royal lineage and the succession in Castile-León, therefore, but also lends perspective toward understanding the significance of similar ties in the king's foreign and domestic policies. (2)

In León Alfonso X's grandfather, Alfonso IX, took as his second wife Berenguela, daughter of Alfonso VIII of Castile. Because the latter Alfonsos were first cousins, the consanguinity of the spouses evoked official disapproval by the church. Alfonso and Berenguela eventually separated, but not before they had had five children. Their second child, and the eldest male, was Fernando (1201-52). In Castile Alfonso VIII was succeeded in 1214 by Enrique I, a boy of eleven. Enrique's death three years later meant that since no brother survived, [152] the crown devolved to his eldest sister. Berenguela quickly arranged for the transfer of royal authority to her son Fernando, acclaimed king of Castile in 1217 as Fernando III. In León, Alfonso IX named as his heirs two daughters from his first marriage; but in an accord with Berenguela, they surrendered their claims to their younger half-brother. Fernando's accession in León, in 1230, marks the end of the periods when these two kingdoms were ruled by different kings. (3) 

[153] Doña Berenguela had supervised Fernando's education and arranged his two marriages. Leaving her to govern in Castile, the king concentrated on campaigns in the south against the Muslims. By 1248 only the Islamic kingdoms of Niebla, Murcia, and Granada remained, and the rulers of all three acknowledged vassalage to Fernando. The king planned to carry the war against the Muslims into Africa, but death thwarted his intention. (4)   The first-born of Fernando III and Beatriz of [154] Swabia succeeded his father in 1252. By then Alfonso X was a man of thirty, well educated, married, and experienced in both diplomacy and war. As a boy of fourteen, he had been present when his father took Cordova. Later, representing the king, he had received the submission of Murcia. Alfonso appears to claim partial credit for the conquest of Jaén and the Algarbe; and he speaks with pride of his participation in the siege and capture of Seville. (5)   With such a preparation, enjoying his father's confidence and playing a major role in Fernando's government, Alfonso quite reasonably might be expected to continue policies already formulated and to elaborate projects already envisioned. (6)

Alfonso's foreign affairs focused on relations with Christian princes and Muslim neighbors, and on the nature of relations between Castile and the other peninsular states. To these [155] traditional concerns must be added Alfonso's claim to the crown of the Holy Roman Empire. Although the pope was one of the temporal princes, the uniqueness of his position in spiritual matters -- and also, according to some theorists, his supremacy in temporal affairs -- required special consideration. In dealings with the pope, Alfonso adopted the point of view that separated the spiritual and temporal realms. In spiritual matters he affirmed the idea of papal supremacy throughout Christendom. (7)   In temporal matters, however, pluralism replaced universal secular authority, papal or imperial; here the Castilian king acknowledged no superior. (8)   Theoretically, Alfonso in his own realm is divinely endowed with supreme authority, (9)   and thus he is the equal of every other sovereign. (10) [156] Historically, he discerned some degree of hegemony or prestige that differentiated the ranks of emperor and king. (11)

As a spiritual matter, crusading continued to be an important subject of mutual concern to pope and king. Alfonso's aim to continue recovery of lands Christendom had lost to Islam was congruent with papal policy, (12)   and he appears in no way inimical to carrying out reforms within what he regarded to be the church's proper jurisdiction. (13)   Temporally, [157] Alfonso's time and energy came to focus on his claim to the Empire, and on his desire to achieve papal recognition as emperor. A sign of negative results appeared in his unsuccessful efforts, begun in 1246, to make good his claim to the duchy of Swabia. (14) By the time Alfonso began to reign in Castile, the Empire had become little more than a symbolic vestige of universal secular authority. Alfonso was aware of its historical significance, nevertheless, and buttressed that knowledge both with a legal claim of inheritance (15)   and with a Biblically based imperative to increase his dominion. (16)   Although invested by his electors with the title Rex Romanorum, used to designate a king of Germany before his coronation as Holy Roman [158] Emperor, Alfonso never traveled to Germany nor was he ever crowned. Rudolf von Habsburg was elected in 1273, then crowned king at Aachen, and recognized (although never crowned) as emperor by Pope Gregory X; this marked the end of Alfonso's hopes, despite his interview with Gregory in June and July 1275. The only profit to Alfonso from that encounter was a concession of ecclesiastical tithes to be used in fighting the Muslims, who had invaded Castile from Africa and Granada during the king's absence. (17) Alfonso's interest in the distant Empire was never shared by most of his subjects. (18)

In pursuing relations with other Christian princes, Alfonso and his advisers developed a program aimed at maintaining as advantageous a position as possible for Castile. Geography and history make obvious the importance of France to Alfonso; maintaining dynastic ties underscored this perception time and again. The king's great-aunt Blanca had become queen of France, as the wife of Louis VIII. Presumably at the behest of their son, Louis IX, Alfonso betrothed his eldest legitimate child and heiress, Berenguela, to the namesake and heir of the French king. The implication for the future is clear, and is documented by Alfonso himself. This particular attempt to unite the Capetian and peninsular Burgundian houses failed when the younger Louis died; (19)   but a second matrimonial project succeeded, when Louis IX's daughter Blanche was married to Berenguela's brother Fernando de la [159] Cerda. Fernando, Alfonso X's third legitimate child, was the king's eldest legitimate son and presumed successor. (20)   After Fernando's premature death, and the proscription in 1282 of Alfonso's second son and new heir Sancho, Alfonso willed that if the young sons of Fernando de la Cerda should fail to produce issue, the king of France (at the time Philippe III the Bold) should acquire title to his domains.

Alfonso points out that the ties between the French king and himself were close: they were direct descendants of Alfonso VII the Emperor, and both were great-grandsons of Alfonso VIII. Despite the rivalry that could arise between neighbors, something greater linked them. Spaniards, Alfonso continues, are a vigorous, passionate people skilled in arms; their characteristics are complemented by those of the rich, powerful, foresighted, well-ordered French. Union of the two nations would make possible a great goal: victory over the enemies of the Faith in the peninsula, in the Holy Land, and elsewhere. The union thus envisaged was not thought of in terms of merged peoples. It would be effected by a unified kingship like that of Castile and León. Hence the significance of the dynastic marriages. (21)

[160] In the peninsula Alfonso directed his foreign policy toward living peacefully with his neighbors, protecting his own interests (identified with those of Castile), and carrying on the crusade. Protecting his interests sometimes got in the way of peace with his neighbors, as in the case of territorial disputes with Portugal over al-Gharb and of claims to the crown of Navarre. And sometimes Alfonso may have extended his interests in a way not readily acceptable to his neighbors - as perhaps he sought to do by establishing Castilian political hegemony on the model provided by imperial León. James of Aragon suspected him of the latter, at least, although any overt effort came to naught. (22)

In the case of Portugal, both military action and familial ties were important policy instruments. Afonso III and his predecessor Sancho II were sons of Afonso II and Urraca, Alfonso X's great-aunt. After the fall of Seville a dispute between Portugal and Castile arose over ownership of al-Gharb, owing in part to the involvement of the order of Santiago and the Muslim kinglet in Niebla. Peace in 1253 included a strengthening of dynastic ties, by the betrothal and subsequent marriage of Alfonso's natural daughter Beatriz to Portugal's Afonso III, despite the fact that Afonso was married [161] to (although separated from) the countess of Boulogne. After the countess's death, the children born to Afonso and Beatriz were legitimized in 1263 by the pope; these children included Afonso's successor, Dinis the Farmer. Grateful for Portuguese help in the Muslim war of the middle sixties, Alfonso X by the treaty of Badajoz in 1267 surrendered his claim to the western al-Gharb. After Dinis succeeded Afonso in 1279, a falling out with the new king obliged Beatriz to exile herself to the Castilian court. There, during the final years of her father's reign and Queen Violante's defection, Beatriz became Alfonso X's greatest single source of consolation and moral support. Relations between the two kings cooled, meanwhile, as the youthful Portuguese sought to satisfy himself that he was totally independent of his older relatives. (23)

Alfonso X's relations with Aragon followed a course similar to those with Portugal: they began on a sour note, improved greatly in the course of James I's reign, and underwent vicissitudes after the accession of James's son Peter. The initial discord derived from the presence in Navarre of dissident Castilian nobles, from James's ties (feudal, dynastic, and by treaty) with Navarre, from interest in the possible marriage of James's daughter Constança to the plotting Infante Enrique of Castile, and from Alfonso's reaction to force either inferred or perceived. Intervention by the Castilian queen, James's daughter Doña Violante, facilitated establishing amity that became cemented in the treaty of Soria in 1256. (24)   A contributing factor to improved relations was the demise of the Infante Alfonso of Aragon, James's son by his Castilian first [162] wife Leonor, Alfonso X's great-aunt. Alfonso of Aragon and Alfonso of Castile (then infante) had become friends, and participated together in the siege of Seville. Alfonso of Aragon had been named heir in Aragon and later in Valencia, but nevertheless remained disaffected over the disposition of the rest of James's realms. (25)

After the death of Alfonso of Aragon, James redivided his kingdoms in 1262 between Peter and James, sons by his second wife. Peter, the new heir to the Aragonese throne, thus was Alfonso X's brother-in-law, and dynastic ties remained close. Relations between Alfonso and Peter became friendly, as Peter took part in the Aragonese suppression of the Moorish uprising in Castilian Murcia. Affairs in general between the two houses became truly amicable, at least partly because of the activity of Doña Violante. An additional factor appeared in 1265 when Alfonso's cousin Berenguela Alfonso, until her death in 1272, became the last of James's mistresses; James's morganatic marriage and the close kinship of the lovers prevented their formal union. (26)   More evidence is visible in 1268 when, at Christmastime, James visited Castile to attend the first mass celebrated by his son Sancho, the new archbishop of Toledo. Other family visits took place in Castile and Aragon annually thereafter through 1274, and possibly in 1275. After James's death in 1276 the situation became more fluid, owing mostly to the succession issue in Castile and to the conflict with the Angevins. (27)

Despite the victory won at Las Navas de Tolosa in 1212 by the Christians, the Muslims separately or in alliances remained a threat to peace and security. In terms of returning the peninsula to Christian rule, however, the Reconquest was assured from 1246 when the king of Granada acknowledged [163] Fernando III as his overlord, on the eve of the siege of Seville. The Primera crónica general confirms the sense of fulfillment. (28)   In view of the local danger, papal efforts to encourage crusade for recovery of the Holy Land met with mixed response in Castile. Fernando's plans to carry the crusade into Africa, and the diplomatic maneuvering that paved the way (1248-52), were followed in Alfonso's reign by financial, diplomatic, and other necessary preparations (1252-60); here Castilian and papal interests were in accord. (29)   Possibly excepting the acquisition in 1258 of an African castle, the only known action of the crusaders south of the Strait of Gibraltar was the brief occupation in September 1260 of the Maghribian port of Salâ (Salé). (30)   This abortive end to years of planning and preparation was marked by other concerns of Alfonso -- particularly by political and military problems posed by the Muslims in the peninsula, and perhaps by Alfonso's pursuit of the imperial crown. The former troubles by 1264 marked the true end to Alfonsine crusading endeavor in Africa, a conclusion confirmed in 1270 by international treaties. (31)   Shortly thereafter the king's rationalizing of the intermittent character of his[164] holy war activities is recorded in the General estoria,(32) citing a combination of factors.

Although the peninsular Islamic rulers were Castilian vassals, the Muslims in parts of Andalusia succeeded in casting off Castilian rule upon the death of Fernando III.  Alfonso's authority was restored; (33) but the danger of insurrection or rebellion persisted, because the Moors were more numerous than the Christians and because they nourished the hope, encouraged by coreligionists abroad, for the eventual return of Islamic authority. Alfonso's attempt to deal realistically with the situation included the policy of permitting Muslim rulers who acknowledged vassalage to retain their regal titles. (34) Once he had acquired, by pact or conquest, strategic and other holdings in a populated area, he encouraged peaceful response from the Moorish population at large by letting Muslims continue to observe their religious practices and law.

The dangers inherent in the circumstances were realized early in 1264, when the Mudejars or subject Muslims in Alfonso's kingdom of Seville, and the Muslims of the vassal kingdom of Murcia, rose in rebellion according to a plan [165] coordinated with the rulers of Granada and Marinid Fez. (35) The Castilians recovered most of the area around Seville by the end of the year; (36) in the following summer Alfonso and Muhammad I of Granada arranged a temporary peace. (37)   While the Castilian king was occupied in the west and south of Andalusia, James of Aragon -- on Alfonso's behalf -- undertook the conquest of Murcia in the east. The task was completed early in 1266. (38)

[166] During the rest of Alfonso's reign, the Castilian's policies toward the Muslims aimed at colonizing Andalusia, maintaining peace with Granada, and barring or dislodging the Marinid Abû Yûsuf Ya'qûb from the peninsula. (39) Granada he sought to keep off balance, its strength neutralized, by lending support to the Banû Ashkîlûla, the semiautonomous governors (arráeces) of Islamic Guadix, Málaga, and Comares. (40) Complicating the policy was the presence in Granada of self-exiled dissident Castilian nobles, and the feeling of Muhammad II that Alfonso had deceived him in the agreement at Seville regarding the arráeces. (41) The Granadan sought to counter this move, and to strengthen his own position, by facilitating the entry of the Africans while Alfonso was abroad. (42) The use of the ports of Tarifa and Algeciras virtually at will by Abû Yûsuf Ya'qûb evoked from Alfonso a direct effort to oust him. (43)   The failure of Alfonso's attempt is tied directly to events concerning the succession issue in Castile.

[167] Reconquest and law interacted. Fernando III had been concerned with consolidating his military gains through the administrative and institutional integration of the conquered territories. Carrying out the program conceived (at least in part) during Fernando's lifetime became the legacy of Alfonso X. At first policies centered on the most urgent matters: defense and population of the added lands. (44) Principal means of accomplishment included immediately placing fortified sites, as well as certain civic and strategic buildings and tracts, under royal control; distributing land among the victors (knights of lineage, cavalry, and infantrymen); and introducing law and exemptions, designed to facilitate permanent settlement by the triumphant Castilians and those who followed them. Seville provides an example. It had capitulated in 1248, and Fernando III had granted it the fuero of Toledo. (45)   Land distribution was outlined by Fernando, (46) perhaps enacted in the Alfonsine Cortes of 1252, and completed by 1254. The allotments thus effected were supplemented or modified by reforms and royal letters. (47) For some other localities, land distribution was completed during Alfonso's reign for the first time. For still others new repartimientos were carried out, because grantees either had failed to take possession of allotted holdings or else had abandoned their grants. The rebellion of the Mudejars early in Alfonso's reign and the war of 1264-66 were among the most significant factors determining subsequent periods of land distribution. (48)

[168] Those who benefited most in Andalusia, in the extent and quality of possessions, were the military orders (especially Santiago and Calatrava), (49) the archbishops of Toledo and Seville, the bishop of Cordova, and individual nobles, including members of the royal family. In Murcia those benefiting were the orders, the bishop-elect of Cartagena, Queen Violante and royal officials. Practical need weighed heavily in grants to the orders; their allotments were near the frontier, where members were available for both offensive and defensive action. In securing adherence to the king, the policy was but partially effective; only some of the beneficiaries reciprocated with loyalty to Alfonso during the civil strife of his last two years. (50)

Expansion in the south, attendant shifts in population, and several other factors affected the legal situation in the rest of the realm as well as in the lands recently acquired. In order to understand the relationship between these changes and the Alfonsine program for legal reform, we first must turn to the state of legal thought and development at the beginning of [169] Alfonso's reign. Civil law included royal law and customary law, and in Castile it would come to include jurisprudence. Collections and codifications containing these laws varied according to source; to the nation, religious community, or social class for which intended; and to the place where operative. Royal law (statutory or prescription, created by the individual king) is traceable to the early eleventh century. Distinguished from the law of the realm, it had its chief source in the king's decisions about matters subject to litigation, including the confirmation by each succeeding king of municipal fueros. (51) In making his decisions, the king might have recourse to jurists for technical counsel or to a Cortes for political advice. The decisions were published in different documentary forms: letters or charters, privileges, and ordinances.

The law of the realm, which included the king but not royal law, derived ultimately from the juridical recognition of practices and usage. This customary law took the form of general law and special law. General law had its source in the survival, after the Muslim invasion, of the Visigothic Liber judiciorum in a modified version. This version was rooted in daily customs based on or inspired by the Liber, and it offered varying modes in different regions. In the face of the general law of the Liber, there appeared a special law that made reference to it. This special law had two aspects: municipal law, or law of the land organized in an autonomous form; and malos usos ("bad practices"), or law of the land not organized in an autonomous form. Elements composing customary law included recurring practice (usos), regard for a particular situation that ran counter to the general (privilegios), individual or community conduct (fazañas), and precepts extracted from narrative or from legal and doctrinal works.

In the thirteenth century, municipal or local law was [170] embodied in the fueros extensos, legal collections more extensive than their predecessors. Such fueros were divided into parts indicated by headings; and a number of them were translated into, or published in, Romance. So-called families of fueros developed when kings (notably Alfonso VIII and Fernando III) sought to generalize a particular fuero by granting it, sometimes with differences required by local circumstances to several localities that lacked a known juridical tradition. This policy increased the territorial character of certain fueros, and thus contributed to restraining the degree of legal disparity among the various municipal codes. The trend accelerated when Fernando III propagated the Fuero juzgo, already in force in León and Toledo, among the main cities of Andalusia and Murcia. (52)

[171] Seignorial, or nobiliary, law originated in the reign of Alfonso VIII; it refers to territorial compilations created in Castile by nobles, historians, and jurists, many of whom were ecclesiastics. Two such compilations are the Libra de los fueros de Castilla and the Fuero viejo de Castilla, generally said to date from the mid-thirteenth century. (53) The fazañas in these works had their origin at the time Castile declared independence from León in the selection of judges, who under the circumstances could hardly be expected to accept the Liber and who therefore resorted to deliberation by arbitration. The obvious limitation on royal authority in Castile -- when a kingdom was established there eventually -- was preserved in private redactions of Castilian territorial law, such as those mentioned, in an attempt to counteract the royal program. Because the law of the fijos dalgo limited royal authority, it was anathema to Alfonso X. (54)

In addition to royal ordinance (ley) and customary law (in the various fueros), jurisprudence became the third component of civil law. Its sources were judicial opinion (decisions of [172] judges) and doctrinal opinion (opinions of legal experts). Judicial decisions sometimes became fazañas; these subsequently became part of normative law when transformed into customary law, especially by way of incorporation into fueros. Doctrinal opinion is represented by the work of the glossators, scholars who analyzed and clarified the literal meaning of a text by using figures and categories from Aristotelian logic. Their technique was developed at Bologna in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and expanded and exported in the thirteenth century. (55)

The glossators and other university scholars were primarily responsible for the reception of common law in Castile, (56)   Common law refers to the juridical system, arising in Italy, that resulted from the contact (but not the fusing) of Justinian Roman law, canon law, and feudal law, and it also takes in maritime law. (57)   Slowness in adopting common law in the peninsula is explained by Hispanic objections to the thesis of [173] the emperor as lord of the secular world; by distrust, on the part of the unlettered, toward university graduates and scholars in law; and by variations in the strength and cohesiveness of the juridical ordinance in the different kingdoms. (58)   Adoption began in the thirteenth century, nevertheless, and expanded as contacts abroad increased. (59)

Although some recent discussion centers on whether the existence of an Alfonsine program for codification was real or supposed, (60)   there is little doubt that a program did exist, in view of the continuity in policies from Fernando's reign, especially evident juridically in the dissemination of recastings of the Fuero juzgo. With origins as far back as actions taken by Alfonso VIII, the program took into account the operation in León of the Liber judiciorum, with its principle that the king was creator of the law; in the new territories it took into account the fueros breves or the privileges, and a complete juridical ordinance -- the vernacular version of the Liber as a fuero extenso known as the Fuero juzgo. In Castile and the Extremaduras, however, Fernando and Alfonso faced a variety of municipal fueros, and even a seignorial law that in the fazañas provided for nonroyal creation of law. During the first half of the thirteenth century, and particularly in the reign of Fernando III, the royal position strengthened sufficiently for the king to challenge both municipal law generally and seignorial law (especially the fazañas) in Castile. (The Liber failed to evolve and tended to disappear as general law.) The main attack began early in Alfonso's reign. (61)

The Alfonsine program is still under study. The four main sources embodying it can now be put into some perspective, however, and the current controversies presented. (62)   The [174] Setenario is the only longer work that can be presumed to bear its original title. (63)   The purpose of the Setenario is clearly stated: to serve as a guide for those who were to govern. Doctrinal and expository in nature, it was like other medieval specula intended to edify the prince with a special body of moral doctrine and a guide to good conduct "que oyesen a menudo." (64)   The sources have not been studied. The Setenario begins with commentary on the Names of God, followed immediately by an encomium of Fernando III and the kingdom of Seville and by a statement of Fernando's wishes concerning the book. After this introduction the principal text begins with an explanation of the title and the treatment by sevens, and proceeds logically and systematically through a discussion of pagan and Christian cosmology and learning to the Christian church and the seven sacraments. Ending with an exposition of the fourth sacrament, the work as we have it is incomplete. Whether or not it was ever completed is not clear from the text itself. Internal evidence indicates that the whole was at least planned. (65)   The Setenario was conceived at an unknown date, possibly after the fall of Seville, by Fernando [175] III, (66)   apparently begun by him and his collaborators. (67)   It was subsequently assigned to the Infante Alfonso (68)   after his initiation into the project, (69)   then at the king's death entrusted to Alfonso for completion, (70)   and finally continued after Alfonso became king. (71)   There can be very little doubt that Alfonso intervened editorially, even though he may (72)   or may not (73)   have been the actual author of all or part of the work. His participation in preparing the Setenario most likely occurred in Seville sometime during the period 1249-53, very possibly during the last two years. (74)

[176] The original title of the Fuero real is not certain. A seemingly irrefutable reference dated February 1269 first calls it "el libro del fuero e de los juicios" and then "el libro de los juicios." (75)   The text as edited by the Royal Academy of History refers to itself only as "este fuero." Individual post-Alfonsine manuscripts are nearly as noncommittal -- such as "el libro del fuero" in Escorial manuscript K.3.25. Later the Fuero acquired several other names. (76)   The stated purpose of the Fuero real was to fill the need for a fuero presumably not available previously, and to reconcile the discrepancies in existing law. (77)   Alfonso clearly meant to replace the malos usos, so repugnant to him, with a standardized municipal fuero based on a text that favored royal law. Promulgation is commonly ascribed to 1255. (78)   The Fuero real is more comprehensive and [177]systematic than earlier fueros. (79)   Its four Books, each subdivided into títulos and leyes, deal respectively with (1) the creed; protection of (and obligations to) the king, the royal family, and ecclesiastical property; and personnel and matters involved in litigating; (2) trial law; (3) civil matters such as matrimony, inheritance, testaments, and contracts; and (4) penal law. The sources, not yet studied as a whole, require reference to the Fuero juzgo, municipal fueros, and the Decretales of Gregory IX. (80)

The Fuero real was presented in Alfonso's name, following his consultation with his court and with legal scholars. (81)   It is not known who did the actual codification. Date and place of composition are the subject of speculation. (82)   The Academy's base text, Escorial manuscript Z.2.8, gives the date of completion as 30 August 1255. The trustworthiness of this statement is open to question, given the absence of the original codex and the appearance of generalizations in some of the manuscript copies and redactions. In view of the reference in [178] 1269, one can say with certainty only that the Fuero real was published sometime during the period 1255-68. The date of composition can conceivably be pushed back to 1254 with the arrival of Alfonso in Castile. (83)

The codification known as the Espéculo acquired this title no later than the fourteenth century. Whether or not it was the original title is not obvious in the earliest surviving text. The purpose declared in the prologue, differing somewhat from that in the Fuero real, was to put an end to anarchy in law and to provide a written code (the mirror simile is introduced here) that would serve as the juridical norm throughout [179]Alfonso's realms and domains. (84)   Unlike the Fuero real, which recognized the operation of fazañas, the Espéculo prologue rejects them. Regardless of original intentions for general application of the code, its casuistic limitations are said to have caused its restriction to use by the king, the royal court, and royally appointed officers and judges. (85)   Incomplete in its extant version, the Espéculo is divided into five Books subdivided into títulos and leyes. Internal references reveal that the total number of Books was, or was intended to be, at least seven. Book 1 concerns church and faith; Book 2 the king and royal family, property, and household; Book 3 warfare and military law; Book 4 judicial personnel; and Book 5 judicial and litigation procedures. Books 6 and 7 respectively would have treated canon law and civil law (including contracts and inheritance). (86)

[180] In contrast with the Setenario, the Espéculo plainly is intended to be a legal codification. In contrast with the Fuero real it is more comprehensive in scope and ampler in treatment. The prologue presents Alfonso X as having authored the laws ("ffeziemos estas leys") with the advice and consent of the prelates, higher nobles, legal experts, and "otros"-- probably royal administrators and judicial officers -- from the court and the realm. (87) The actual author(s) and the place of composition are not known, but historians have given dates ranging from 1254 to 1258. (88)   Investigation, concluded in 1976 although published for the first time in my forthcoming edition, leads me to think that composition was taking place in 1254 and was completed by the spring of 1255, and that a likely site of activity was Burgos.

The Siete partidas may have received this name as early as the reign of Sancho IV (1284-95), since the first known citation occurs in the Leyes del estilo. (89) In the introduction to what generally is regarded as the oldest Partida codex extant, the work is called "el Libro del fuero de las leyes que fizo el noble don Alffonso." The original prologue in the same manuscript [181] uses only the terms "este libro" and "estas leyes." (90) The purpose announced corresponds to that given in the Espéculo. In intent and character the law becomes instructive and preventive, rather than penal, as definitions and moral maxims are used skillfully to clarify, exhort, or admonish. (91)   The Siete partidas represents an encyclopedic and systematic integration of definition, prescription, explanation, and amplification of materials from many sources -- classical and contemporary, canonical and secular, Roman and Castilian, legal and literary -- in different languages. The reception of common law in Castile reaches fulfillment in this juridical summa, the fruit of collaboration by a variety of scholars. (92)   Although the codex mentioned contains only the Primera partida, the prologue implies that more than one Partida existed or was planned: "aqui comiença el primero libro." (93)

The seven Books of the Partidas are divided into títulos and leyes. Book 1, the Primera partida, treats law-making in general, the church, and matters of faith and religious practice. Book 2 concerns secular rule and royal officers, military law, [182] and universities. Book 3 covers administration of justice and judicial procedures. Book 4 deals with marriage and other social and legal personal relationships. Book 5 concerns contracts. Book 6 is devoted to testamentary law and inheritance.  Book 7 focuses on penal law, including that pertaining to the relations of Christians with Jews, Moors, and heretics. The text is attributed to Alfonso X; but some of the work is post-Alfonsine, with the later scholars magnifying the authoritativeness of the code as they invoke Alfonso's name. The legal particulars in the prologue to the Espéculo are absent from the prologue in the British Library manuscript of the Primera partida. Not operative in Alfonso's time, the Siete partidas went through several redactions that reflect stages -- not always even -- of growth and modification before Alfonso XI promulgated the code in 1348. (94)   Even then the text did not remain fixed in a unique official version. (95)   Given the long period of development, the place of composition may have varied; several sites have been suggested as likely candidates for all or part of the labor.

Both the textual and the juridical relationships of the Setenario, the Fuero real, the Espéculo, and the Siete partidas remained without a generally satisfactory theoretical treatment before 1950. The study published by Alfonso García-Gallo in 1951 offered for the first time a hypothesis that encompassed all four texts, and recognized a twofold program conceived by Fernando III and executed by Alfonso X. (96) Their effort, according to this hypothesis, professed a didactic as well as a [183] narrowly juridical purpose. In addition they proposed to increase uniformity in the fueros granted, as much as differing local circumstances would permit. The doctrinal aspect was paramount in the Setenario, reserved for instruction, and the practical aspect in the concession of fueros was based in part on the Fuero juzgo. In Alfonso's reign the aim went further, becoming a conscious effort to have all towns governed by one and the same law, and all local judges applying the same norms. The king and his officers also would use a single law, but one that was more comprehensive and progressive than that granted to the municipalities. The Fuero real and the Siete partidas were to be the respective means for carrying out this policy.

According to García-Gallo, the Espéculo represented the earliest extant redaction of the Siete partidas. What traditionally -- on the basis of the dates in the prologue added later -- had been regarded as the first redaction of the Partidas, he believed to be the second redaction. Application of the Espéculo was restricted to royal courts. Hence the towns had their municipal fuero for use by local judges, and the royal fuero for use by royal judges. Adverse reaction, together with other circumstances, obliged Alfonso to yield to the demand for confirmation of fueros and privileges in force before his accession. The evidence points to the Espéculo as the code thus rejected, because it regulated public law, whereas the Fuero real dealt only with private and penal law in a conservative sense and continued to be granted after Alfonso's time. The code that García-Gallo calls the "Libro del fuero de las leyes" resulted from successive redactions, as the original text of the Espéculo continued to be studied and revised by jurists, in Alfonso's reign and beyond, with or without royal collaboration, while it evolved into the Siete partidas promulgated as suppletory law in 1348.

Inspired by new thoughts, by contributions from other scholars, and especially by the opportune expression of some differing ideas by J. A. Arias Bonet, García-Gallo in 1976 [184] significantly modified his hypothesis (97)   to say that the fueros granted during the 1250s, previously thought by scholars to have been the Fuero real, really were the Espéculo in its original text. (98)   This would mean that the Espéculo was redacted [185] between 1255 and 1260, copied in 1265, superseded in application in 1272, (99)   and restricted in 1274 to specified cases to be tried in the king's court. After Alfonso's death the elaboration of this text followed two courses. One course emphasized the doctrinal content that, combined with material from the Setenario and other sources, resulted in the Siete partidas (redactions of ca. 1290 and ca. 1300, and successive revisions). The other course eliminated doctrinal material and anything else not appropriate for local law, adapted the municipal fuero to new juridical currents, and resulted by 1293 in the Fuero real. Thus both the doctrinal Setenario and the juridical Espéculo are Alfonsine texts, but both cease to have importance in themselves as they developed into a post-Alfonsine codification that was attributed to Alfonso X. The Setenario is absorbed in the current. The Espéculo, with its emphasis on royal authority and powers, on the one hand is replaced by the Fuero real, a royal code more restricted in scope and application and therefore more acceptable to the governed, and on the other hand is reworked as the base for the Siete partidas.

[186] While García-Gallo's hypothesis has yet to be proved or disproved in toto, well-founded objections are not wanting These objections are particularly strong about the dates of composition and promulgation of the Fuero real, (100)   and the earliest dates of the Siete partidas; (101)   both are regarded as Alfonsine by all scholars, to my knowledge, except by García-Gallo in his revised proposal. Other questions involve the character and relationship of the Fuero real and the Espéculo. In the present state of the matter Aquilino Iglesia Ferreirós probably comes close to the truth in regarding both works as dating from early in Alfonso's reign. The Fuero real then represents the intention to unify Castile juridically, while the Espéculo apparently was intended to unify all Alfonso's realms in similar fashion. By way of promulgation the king granted the Fuero real individually to several cities, whereas work on the Espéculo was interrupted by attention to the imperial venture and its implications. (102)

[187] At this point the focus in the legal program shifted to the Partidas -- imagined as a comprehensive, systematic summa comparable in law to the chronologically later Alfonsine historiography. The material from earlier works such as the Setenario and the Espéculo was incorporated into the new project. Meanwhile the Fuero real would have continued to be operative until the validity of the older fueros was ratified in 1272-73. Although the code then ceased to have the force it was endowed with when promulgated, the Fuero real flourished in the following century when it officially gained new life and again exerted its influence. (103)   The last word on the textual situation is García-Gallo's, when he declares the need for a critical edition of the Partidas. A solution to the problem of manuscript tradition and textual relationships, one that would generally satisfy scholars, cannot be realized before the several codes mentioned (and other texts too) are available in trustworthy editions. These editions must take into account all manuscripts possible and identify all recensions. (104)

Alfonso's legal program elicited unfavorable reactions in some quarters, and explicit opposition as well. The allied rebelliousness of the nobles, based ultimately on individual or family interest, (105)   was manifested chiefly in rivalry between [188] the houses of Haro and Lara, and between the king and three of his brothers. The Laras had fallen into disfavor with the crown in the days of Doña Berenguela and Fernando III. (106)   Alfonso both as infante and as king excessively favored a Lara, however, and his policy led early in the reign to the self-exile (desnaturamiento) of the king's chief military commander, Diego López de Haro. (107)   The strained relations that had existed between the Infante Enrique and his father, Fernando III, also existed between Enrique and the new king. Enrique in Seville and Diego López in the north allied themselves with James of Aragon. Following Don Diego's death in 1254, the Castilian prince and the Aragonese king agreed upon the marriage of James's daughter Constança to Enrique. The marriage never took place, in part because of the intervention of Constança's sister Violante of Castile, who waxed jealous and fearful at the prospect of a threat, if not challenge, to the strength of her husband's position.

In October 1255 Enrique, alone save for his own adherents, began a rebellion in the southwest. Despite winning a victory over Nuño González de Lara, Enrique saw that in time he would be defeated. He left Castile to initiate a life of bellicose adventure and long captivity abroad, shared in part with his older brother Fadrique. (108)   Fadrique's disenchantment with Alfonso may have been based on the king's unwillingness to see their mother's hereditary estates in Germany and the duchy of Swabia go to the second-born instead of to himself. Fadrique may have been involved in Enrique's rebellion. Sometime during the first half of 1260, he was exiled by Alfonso for reasons unknown and proceeded to join his brother outside Castile. (109)

[189] In November 1269 discontent surfaced on the part of Nuño González de Lara and the young Lope Díaz de Haro. Acting together, they used the occasion offered by the Cortes of Burgos to talk with other nobles present. (110)   Actual leadership was provided by Don Nuño, and titular leadership by the Infante Felipe.(111)   Participants in these conversations included ecclesiastics with lay or secular concerns. The movement was formalized in 1271 at Lerma. By autumn of 1272 matters had reached the point where Don Nuño, following an inquiry by Alfonso's representatives, communicated to the king seven petitions from the high barons. The grievances thus published reflect the nobles' resentment, as they perceived royal authority and power encroaching on their traditional rights and privileges. In Cortes again at Burgos in 1272, the magnates submitted six more petitions. Whether motivated more by justice or by anxiety to settle matters so he could proceed with the "ida al imperio" (probably both), Alfonso on each occasion made a conciliatory reply. In some instances he agreed and acceded; in others he explained why he did not do so. He named an investigatory commission, headed by the queen, to deal with both general and private petitions.

By 1273 the nobles had obtained most of their demands of [190] a political or judicial nature. (112) They nevertheless decided in favor of self-exile to Granada; at the same time, while brushing off the king's emissaries who sought to dissuade them they expanded their petitions. The most far-reaching of the demands required that the king grant anew to all Castilians the fueros, usos, costumbres, and privilegios as they had existed during the reigns of Fernando III and Alfonso VIII. The mediators reported to the nobles that the king had yielded, and that for their other claims he had promised to follow the results of consultation after all parties had returned to Castile. (113)   When Alfonso learned that those who did not accompany the exiles were resentful over his concessions, he granted them similar concessions (apparently excepting privilegios) in both [191] Castile and León. (114)   By July the exiles had revised their demands still further, and asked for the confirmation of fueros, usos, and costumbres throughout Castile and León as they had existed in the reigns of Alfonso VIII and Alfonso IX. (115)   To this amended petition the king gave his consent. (116)

In the fall of 1272 Alfonso had accompanied his action in favor of the nobles with permission to some towns to return to their old fueros. (117)   Thus he achieved internal peace, if not unity, reinforced by peace with Granada (118) -- two conditions prerequisite to continuing preparations for his journey to interview the pope. (119) One price for settlement was the postponement of broad application of legal reforms and juridical innovations. The result was the explicit delimitation of royal power in the Ordenamiento of Zamora of 1274. (120)   In the larger [192] picture, popular acceptance of common law had been put off; but scholars persevered in their reworking of legal texts. The growth of the Partidas continued its uneven course.

Meanwhile, for Alfonso 1275 was a year of disaster, as Ballesteros accurately characterizes it. The king's delay, the financial outlay, lack of enthusiasm at home, and increasing opposition from a series of popes with Guelph, Capetian, or Angevin sympathies -- all were among the circumstances that obliged even Alfonso to see the fruitlessness of pursuing his imperial hopes. While still at Beaucaire in conversation with Gregory, Alfonso learned of the fragility of his Islamic policies as Granadan and Marinid invaded his realm and devastated the Andalusian countryside. The Castilians suffered severe losses in leadership with the deaths of Nuño González de Lara and the archbishop of Toledo in battle and of Alfonso's heir the Infante Fernando de la Cerda from sudden illness. (121) The rest of the reign was filled with the consequences of Alfonso's decisions about the succession.

Before dying, the Infante Fernando had entrusted to the chief noble present, Juan Núñez de Lara, his two sons and their claim to succeed Alfonso X. (122) When this charge was revealed, Lope Díaz de Haro, scion of the Laras' ancient rivals, urged Alfonso X's second son Sancho (1258-95) to go south and assume leadership in the war. Naturally, the success Sancho achieved there was gratifying to Alfonso when the king returned to Castile, whereupon talk about Sancho's becoming the new heir was encouraged, if not instigated, by Lope Díaz. (123) Alfonso did name Sancho at the Cortes of Burgos [193] in 1276; (124) and it is most likely for this reason that Juan Núñez then left for France. (125) Questions there over the situation in Navarre had resulted in deterioration of relations with Castile, following the accession of Philippe III, uncle to the little Alfonso de la Cerda and champion of his interests. (126)

Two parties thus developed in Castile concerning the succession. One side, centering on the Infante Fernando's wife Doña Blanca and on Queen Violante, favored the cause of the child Alfonso de la Cerda. The other party, headed by the Infante Fadrique, Don Lope Díaz de Haro, and other nobles, favored Sancho's claim. (127) The basis for argument was the line of succession. The precedence of lineal descent over collateral kinship was not in dispute. (128) In the expected course of events Alfonso de la Cerda would have succeeded his father Fernando. The problem arose when the Infante Fernando died before he became king. Hence Alfonso de la Cerda could not be the heir, argued Sancho's supporters, because his [194] father had not died a king; (129) and therefore the inheritance should devolve on the king's second son. (130)

Alfonso's decision was reinforced, probably at the Cortes of Segovia in 1278, when Sancho began to rule with his father. (131) After the Cortes Queen Violante, accompanied by her daughter-in-law Blanca and the two sons of the deceased [195] infante, fled to the court of Violante's brother, King Peter of Aragon. (132) Peter, aware of his advantage, did not hesitate to use his custody of the boys in subsequent diplomatic maneuvering with Castile and France. (133) Sancho proceeded to work on behalf of his mother's return to Castile, undoubtedly hoping to obtain her support and most likely concealing from her his plan to see that the boys remained in Aragon. In order to pay the debts the queen had incurred and to facilitate her journey home, he diverted funds intended to support Alfonso's siege of Algeciras, then in Marinid hands. Violante returned to Castile alone, (134) but the diversion of funds caused the siege to collapse (1279). The king sentenced the tax-gatherer who had surrendered the funds to be dragged to death, and obliged Sancho to witness the execution of sentence. (135)

The state of affairs took a new turn after an interview between Alfonso and Philippe in December 1280. Alfonso offered to give the kingdom of Jaén in vassalage to Alfonso de la Cerda, (136) but the proposal was insufficient to satisfy the French king; (137)   Alfonso de la Cerda remained in Aragon. Sancho looked with strong disfavor upon any idea of partitioning the realm. (138)   When Aragon and Castile signed a treaty of friendship in March 1281, the infante used the opportunity to cede to Peter his claim to the Navarrese succession. A tacit [196]understanding developed between nephew and uncle that the Cerda boys would remain in Aragon, to Sancho's obvious political advantage in Castile. (139)

A rift between Sancho and Alfonso, evident by November 1281, was the direct result of Sancho's suspicion that the king might partition the realm for the benefit of Alfonso de la Cerda. (140) The rift had become an open break by the time Sancho summoned an assembly in Valladolid in the spring of and he enlisted support based on popular discontent with longstanding economic and financial problems. (141)   Civil war ensued. (142) The king had sought vainly for reconciliation; he continued to seek it (143) even in the face of rebellion, the disinheritance and condemnation of Sancho that he was obliged to proclaim, (144) the poor health that had plagued him for some time, (145) and the lack of response from his royal kin abroad. (146)   By the fall of 1283 the current of sentiment began [197] to shift in his favor. His cause received encouragement through official papal action against Sancho and his adherents, (147) and financial and military support solicited from his old adversary Abû Yûsuf Ya'qûb. (148) Helpful too were the excesses of the rebels, defections from their cause, (149) and Sancho's own apparent interest in some kind of coming to terms. (150) Alfonso X died, however, before he could enjoy the outcome of these events and trends. The people accepted Sancho IV as his successor.

The conclusion is replete with irony. First, the line of succession prescribed by the new Alfonsine laws appears to be rejected in the king's own recognition of Sancho. Then, as Alfonso tried to salve his conscience and divide his lands (in accord with his right to do so, with precedent, and with the Castilian king's seigniory to be maintained), his plan was defeated by the nobles' continuing rebellion against his authority, aided by popular discontent with war, the straitened economy, and attendant fiscal problems. The opposition was headed by the heir he had named in 1276. Thus the action of the magnates in supporting Sancho's claim ends up, in this complexity, as responsible for maintaining the political unity of the realm -- in accord with the new Alfonsine law, and in discord with both precedent and the immediate interests of the nobles themselves. In the face of all his frustration and adversity, Alfonso no doubt would have felt much joy when his namesake promulgated the Siete partidas many years later. [198] His law at last prevailed -- and with it, for better or for worse the institutionalization of the stronger central authority for which he had labored.(151)

The program of Alfonso X was meant to round out and realize policies whose sources may be detected in the reign of Alfonso VIII, and whose conception occurred in that of Fernando III. These policies Alfonso based on the Biblical injunction to increase and multiply, interpreted by him to refer to his dominion, and to see in conformity with Christian doctrine that peace, justice, and lawful conduct prevail among his subjects. Abroad he sought to achieve his aims peacefully through marriage or by pact. Except for taking the offensive in an abortive crusade, he resorted to force or intimidation only when his kingdom was invaded or seriously threatened. At home Alfonso aimed to achieve strength and security through settlement and population, especially in lands acquired recently from the Muslims, and to provide his successors and his people with a guide to proper conduct. This last plan grew to become the project for legal reform -- the centralization of authority and power in the king, an accomplishment buttressed with systematic expression grounded in Alfonsine selection and interpretation of political ideas -- and for reorganizing the administrative and judicial system.

The implementation and successful conclusion of Alfonso's plans and policies were bound inextricably with, and strongly affected by, circumstances beyond the king's control. The most important of these accidents of history were the imperial elections of 1257, Muslim uprisings and invasions, actions initiated by the fractious nobility, and the death of the king's heir. Alfonso's foreign policy did result in boundaries more clearly defined, and in generally peaceful relations with Christian kings. His dreams of empire in the peninsula and in [199] Gemany died hard. Crusading abroad remained an ideal, as long preparation dissolved in disaster. Islamic holdings in the peninsula were reduced to a single independent kingdom, usually held in check. Through Granadan collusion with the Africans, however, in the final decade of Alfonso's reign Islam obtained a foothold in Europe that it would not soon relinquish. Within Castile the Muslim questions eased as military victory in the sixties facilitated internal land distribution and resettlement; but these programs in turn engendered new social, economic, and legal problems for the victorious Christians.

Royalist legal thought had become imbued with Roman principles, which included preeminence of royal prescription over customary law, and systematizing in codification. In Old Castile, where the new Alfonsine codes were intended to replace the public creation of law, the legal expression of such ideas was revolutionary. Elsewhere the innovations were planned to replace, at least in part, the principles of customary law surviving or deriving from the Visigothic code. Thus in the seventies a new confrontation arose when first the nobles, and later the towns, sought to maintain their ancient rights in opposition to encroachment by royal authority. Although the opposition was successful for the moment, the resulting definition of royal powers, together with the juridical ideas that had been sown, in time yielded positive results for the Alfonsine program. The Fuero real and the Siete partidas (the latter developing out of the Espéculo and incorporating material from the Setenario and many other sources) three reigns later became part of the basic law of Castile. The Partidas went on to influence the legal systems of Aragon and Portugal as well. Hence one can say that, through them, the spread throughout the peninsula of Roman legal principles and the theoretical institutionalizing of a stronger central (royal) authority have important foundations in the program of Alfonso X and his advisers.

A Note on the Sources

[200]The so-called Leyes para los adelantados mayores is a group of five leyes, in only one known (fifteenth-century) manuscript, edited by the Real Academia de la Historia, Opúsculos legales, vol. 2 pp. 173-77. A single, otherwise unsupported statement attributes them to Alfonso in Valladolid, 1255 (Francisco Martínez Marina, Ensayo histórico-crítico sobre la legislación y principales cuerpos legales de los reinos de León y Castilla, especialmente sobre el código de las Siete partidas de D. Alonso el Sabio [Madrid 1845], pp. xvii and 399, n. 1). Pérez-Prendes, the only historian who gives the text critical attention, regards it as a skillful private falsification of provisions taken from the Espéculo, because it attributes to the adelantados mayores what in the Espéculo is assigned to the merinos mayores ("Las leyes de los adelantados mayores," Hidalguía 10 [1962], pp. 370, 379, 382). The Leyes date from after composition of Books 4 and 5 of the Espéculo, but very likely are from Alfonso's reign, perhaps from the period when the adelantamientos mayores were suppressed in León (1268) and Castile (1269), when the nobles sought in the Cortes at Burgos in 1272 to have the merinos in León and Castile replaced with adelantados. Ballesteros, citing no source, gives 1270; my comparison of confirmer-lists produces the earlier dates. See Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 25; and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 523, 580-81.

The Ordenamiento de las tafurerías is the name given to a book of forty-four leyes (edited by the Academy, Opúsculos legales, vol. 2, pp. 211-31) arranged at Alfonso's command by the jurisconsult Master Roldán in 1276 or 1277 (the date varies in the at least fourteen medieval and two postmedieval manuscripts I know). The work regulates gambling houses and the conduct of gamblers; it recognizes the fact that control is more effective than the prohibition Alfonso had proclaimed in 1268 and had then eased in the grant of more realistic regulations to Murcia in 1272. See CLC, vol. 1, p. 78; and Ballesteros Alfonso X, p. 550.

Ordenamientos are extant for at least some of the Cortes that [201] took place during Alfonso's reign. These official responses by the king to the petitions presented (in cuadernos de peticiones) were sent (in cuadernos de Cortes) to interested parties, sometimes with minor variations in text; the ordenamientos that survive are addressed mainly to municipalities. A list of the main assemblies including those properly termed Cortes, and critically treated supporting evidence along with commentary on Ballesteros, are in Procter's Curia and Cortes, pp. 124-48. I have not checked each instance in this posthumously published book, but to the list therein one might add Cortes in Burgos in November 1254 (Julio Puyol y Alfonso, "Las crónicas anónimas de Sahagún," BRAH 77 [1920], p. 184). I am not aware that anyone has ever referred to these Cortes that followed the marriage of Alfonso X's half-sister Leonor to the future Edward I of England.

The so-called Ordenamiento of Zamora (1274) is contained in a single codex of the sixteenth century (Cortes de León y Castilla, vol. 1, no. 16). Procter (Curia and Cortes, pp. 137-38) suggests that this work, generally regarded as a cuaderno de Cortes, may instead be a compilation of answers to, or clarification of, legal questions. Iglesia Ferreirós ("Las Cortes de Zamora de 1274 y los casos de corte," AHDE 41 [1971], pp. 945-71) discusses the relationship of the provisions with other texts of the time.

Among published and unpublished examples of a regulatory nature are those concerning the Mesta (1271, 1273, 1276, 1278). See Julius Klein, "Los privilegios de la Mesta de 1273 y 1276," BRAH 44 [1914], pp. 205-19; Rafael Serra Ruiz, "El reino de Murcia y el honrado concejo de la Mesta: a propósito de un documento confirmado por Alfonso X, año 1271," AUM, Derecho 20 (1961-62), pp. 142-61; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 679 and n. 3, p. 855; José Rodríguez Molina, "La Mesta de Jaén y sus conflictos con los agricultores (1278-1359)," CEM 1 (1973), pp. 68-69, 77-81; Dufourcq and Gautier-Dalché, Histoire économique et sociale de I'Espagne chrétienne, p. 134; and Bishko, "Castilian as Plainsman," pp. 63-64, who believes the Mesta emerged between 1260 and 1265.

The number of fueros confirmed and granted by Alfonso X [202] is large. Any inventory must consult Ballesteros, "Itinerario," complete only through 1267, and his Alfonso X, which lists well over a thousand royal documents (pp. 1059-1130). The volume of documents Ballesteros transcribed has not been published; Manuel Ballesteros Gaibrois kindly showed the manuscript to me in 1959.

Several years ago I began the long process of transcribing all manuscripts available of the Fuero real, the Siete partidas, the Leyes para los adelantados mayores, the Ordenamiento de las tafurerías, the testaments (in Spanish) of Alfonso X, and some other documents, with the intention of offering new editions. Cf. "Notas sobre la edición de las obras legales atribuidas a Alfonso X de Castilla," AHDE 52 (1983), pp. 721-25. I also am expanding work on identifying Alfonsine collaborators into a prosopographical project on personalities, officials, and scholars of Alfonso's reign. Ballesteros had prepared materials for an extensive documented and critical biography of Alfonsine figures (Alfonso X, p. vi); if completed, it has not been published.

Notes for Chapter Seven

1. "Alfonsine," when referring to program and policies, is understood to include the king's advisers and collaborators. Because the aims in this survey are limited to identifying and describing briefly the program and policies of Alfonso X, the bibliography is not intended to be complete.

2. Alfonsine preoccupation with law on the subject accompanied the growth of canon law and the editorial process culminating in the redaction of the Siete partidas.  See Esteban Martínez Marcos, Las causas matrimoniales en las Partitas de Alfonso el Sabio (Salamanca 1966), pp. 28-35, 44-46.

3. Data from Julio González, El reino de Castilla en la época de Alfonso VIII, 3 vols. (Madrid 1960), vol. 1, pp. 212-13, 217-38; his Alfonso IX, 2 vols. (Madrid 1944), vol. 1, pp. 91-102, 105, 114-20, 159-88, 211-12; and his Fernando III, vol. 1, pp. 61-85. Andrés Marcos Burriel, Memorias para la vida del santo rey don Fernando III, ed. Miguel de Manuel Rodríguez (Barcelona [1800] 1974), pp. 3-155. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 2-53. O'Callaghan, "Beginnings of the Cortes," pp. 1520-21, 1524-28.

4. For the campaigns see the PCG, chaps. 1045-47, 1057, 1069-72, 1075-1130; Julio González, "Las conquistas de Fernando III en Andalucía," Hispania 6 (1946), pp. 515-631. On Fernando's plans see the Setenario, attributed to Alfonso, ed. K. H. Vanderford (Buenos Aires 1945), 23:1-2; PCG, chap, 1131; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 67.

5. The date of Fernando's death (evening of 30 May) and Alfonso's accession (1 June) were much discussed in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 54; and his "Itinerario de Alfonso X, rey de Castilla," BAH 104 (1934), pp. 50-52. For Alfonso in Cordova see MHE, vol. 1, no. 18; PCG, chap. 1048. For Murcia see MHE, vol. 2, no. 229; Setenario, 15:18-19; PCG, chaps. 1060, 1065. Cf. Ballesteros, "La reconquista de Murcia por el infante D. Alfonso de Castilla," Murgetana 1 (1949), pp. 9-48; Juan Torres Fontes, El concejo de Cartagena (Murcia 1977), pp. xix-xx. Alfonso took Mula and Lorca in 1244.  Torres Fontes, "La incorporacion de Lorca a la corona de Castilla," BRAH 165 (1969), pp. 131, 134, 137-39. For Jaén and Algarbe see Setenario, 15:18-21; and corroboration for Jaén in "Chronicon de Cardeña I," ed. Enrique Flórez in his España sagrada, 58 vols. (Madrid 1747-1918), vol. 23, p. 373. For Seville see Setenario, 15:20-21; PCG, chaps. 1098, 1102, 1108-9, 1116; his presence and actions are specified by Alfonso in numerous documents from the chancery. In 1246 the Infante Alfonso had been betrothed to Violante (1237?-1300), James I of Aragon's eldest child by his second wife, Violante of Hungary. See Fernando Valls Taberner, "Relacions familiars i polítiques entre Jaume el Conqueridor i Anfós el Savi," Bulletin hispanique 21 (1919), pp. 9-52, reprinted in Obras selectas, 4 vols. (Madrid 1953" 61), vol. 4, pp. 275-78.

6. On Alfonso's being privy to the king's plans see Setenario,  9:8-10, 10:10-14; Fernandine policy is summarized in 16:2-21. On the Infante's activity in Fernando's government see Gonzalez, Fernando III, vol. 1, pp. 101-7, and Ballesteros, "Burgos y la rebelión" (see above, chap. 3, n. 53). The formal role of the heir to the Castilian kingship as regent, viceroy, or coruler to my knowledge has not been studied. For examples of continuity in program see below, nn. 46, 66-71.

7.  Espéculo MS, 1:2.1 (cf. 4:7.29): "Nuestro Ssennor Iesu Cristo . . . ffizo cabdiello a Ssant Pedro . . . et diol las laues de los rregnos de los Çielos. . . . Et oujeron lo quantos apostoligos ffueron despues del, & auer-lo-an quantos sseran daqui adelante: ellos, & los arçobispos, & los obispos & los otros perlados de Ssanta Eglesia que an poder del apostoligo; ca tienen logar de Nuestro Ssennor lesu Cristo en Tierra." A specific statement on the two-swords theory begins this ley, contained in the margins of BNM, Ms. 10123, fols. 94r-v, contrary to the note in the edition by the Real Academia de la Historia. Espéculo MS, 5:5.2: "el apostolligo tiene logar de Nuestro Ssennor Iesu Cristo en Tierra." Transcription of the text of Espéculo in BNM, Ms. 10123, is quoted from my forthcoming edition. In this paper I omit citations from the Siete partidas in view of controversy surrounding the chronology of the redactions and the acceptance by most scholars today of the Espéculo as being the earlier work.

8. Espéculo MS, 1:1.3 and 13: "non auemos mayor ssobre Nos en el tenporal"; 2:1.5: "Onrrado deue sseer el rrey como aquel que tiene logar de Nuestro Ssennor Dios en Tierra para ffazer justiçia en ssu rregno quanto en el tenporal, et porque lieua nonbre de Nuestro Ssennor en quantol dizen rrey"; 4:7.29; 5:14.11.

9. Espéculo MS, 1:1.13; 2:1. prólogo and 1; 2:1.5: "es ssennor ssobre todos los de ssu tierra"; 4:7.29. Gaines Post comments on both legist and canonical treatments of the formulas rex superiorem non recognoscens and rex imperator in regno suo in the peninsula in "Two Notes on Nationalism in the Middle Ages," Traditio 9 (1953), pp. 304-10, 320; pertinent also is his "'Blessed Lady Spain'-- Vincentius Hispanus and Spanish National Imperialism in the Thirteenth Century," Speculum 29 (1954), p. 199, n. 1, and pp. 202-9. The king is the head of a kingdom with corporative character (Espéculo MS, 2:1.1: "Spintualmjente, dezimos que el rrey es alma del pueblo. . . . Naturalmjente, el rrey es cabeça de su rreyno"; 2:6.2). Cf. José Antonio Maravall, "Del régimen feudal al régimen corporativo en el pensamiento de Alfonso X," BRAH 157 (1965). pp. 244-46. The king is the only creator of law; see Espéculo MS, 1:1.3: "Njnguno non puede ffazer leys ssi non enperador o rrey, o otro por ssu mandamjento dellos"; cf. 1:1.13; 5:13.14.

10. Especulo MS, 2:14. 1: "Corte . . . es logar o sson los mayores ssenores, assi como apostoligo, o enperador, o rrey o otro grant ssennor"; 4:7.20; 5:6.5; 5:8.4; 5:14.11 and 12. Alfonso crowned and knighted himself; Fernando III had knighted himself at the time of his marriage. The Marqués de Mondéjar discusses precedents to this assertion of temporal independence: Gaspar Ibáñez de Segovia, Peralta, y Mendoza, Memorias históricas del rei D. Alonso el Sabio, ed. Francisco Cerdá y Rico (Madrid 1777), bk. 2, chaps. 2-4.

11. Francisco Rico finds this view, in favor of imperial dignity, reflected in the General estoria; see his Alfonso el Sabio y la "General estoria" (Esplugas de Llobregat 1972), pp. 111-14. Contrasting sentiment is implied in Espéculo MS, 1:1.13: "ssi los enperadores & los rreys que los jnperios & los rrenos ovieron por elecçion pudieron ffazer leys en aquello que toujeron como en comjenda, quanto mas Nos que auemos el rregno por derecho heredamjento." Alfonso's election as king of Germany, the influence and labor of legal scholars steeped in Roman legal principles, and the different audiences intended account for the variations in extent and tone of the treatment of empire in the Espéculo and the Siete partidas (cf. below, n. 102).

12. For crusade see below, n. 29. From 1248 to 1260 Castilian policies in the Maghrib coincided with an active papal policy, but they fell into neglect after the breakdown of Alfonso's crusade. See Charles Emmanuel Dufourcq, "Un projet castillan du XIIIe siecle: la 'Croisade d'Afrique,' " Revue d'histoire et de civilisation du Maghreb 1 (1966), pp. 28-30, 32-35, 49-50.

13. The king's relations with the church in Castile and León turned much on the boundaries between ecclesiastical and royal jurisdiction and on financial matters. Peter Linehan, Spanish Church (see above, chap. 3, n. 52), and his "La iglesia de León a mediados del siglo XIII," León y su bistoria 3 (1975). pp. 13-76. A summary of efforts to obtain redress for grievances born of royal aggrandizement at ecclesiastical expense occupies pp. 130-39 of Linehan's "The Spanish Church Revisited: The Episcopal Gravamina of 1279," in Authority and Power: Studies on Medieval Law and Government, ed. Brian Tierney and Peter Linehan (Cambridge 1980), pp. 127-47. Significant changes in jurisdictional claims generally in favor of the church were noted in successive early, post-Alfonsine redactions of the Siete partidas by J. H. Herriott, "The Validity of the Printed Editions of the Primera partida" Romance Philology 5 (1951-52), pp. 169-74. The alteration no doubt reflects the intervention of scholars in Roman Law, but whether they were legist or canonist has not been determined. The royal houses had sought, often with considerable success, to expand their influence and power in the church by having members named to high office. Fernando III followed the policy energetically, and succeeded in having Alfonso X's brothers Felipe and Sancho appointed arch-bishops-elect of Seville and Toledo respectively. In 1255 Alfonso provided for the possibility of at least a cardinalate for Sancho (MHE, vol. 1, no. 26). Later on (1266-75), the archbishop of Toledo would be the Infante Sancho of Aragon, Alfonso X's brother-in-law.

14. Ballesteros suggests (Alfonso X, pp. 52, 164-65) that Alfonso's next-younger brother, Fadrique, had been christened with the Swabian connection in mind. Previous links between the Hohenstaufen and the Castilian royal house are referred to by H. J. Hüffer, "Las relaciones hispanogermanas durante mil doscientos años (un resumen)," REP 36 (1951), p. 47, and documented by O'Callaghan, "Beginnings of the Cortes," pp. 1512-13.

15. Through his mother, Alfonso was the great-grandson of Emperor Frederick Barbarossa and the great-nephew of Emperor Henry VI. Alfonso's grandfather, Henry's younger brother Philip, had also been elected and crowned king of Germany; presumably he would have been crowned emperor as well had he not been murdered before his coronation could take place. Rico sees Alfonso as implying his kinship backward in time through the Hohenstaufens to the great kings of antiquity, with whom he believed he shared similar tasks (Alfonso, pp. 114-20). Family connections with the Byzantine and Latin Empires may possibly have stimulated Alfonso's personal interest or ambition to become emperor (PCG, chap. 997); but no other link is readily apparent. Beatriz of Swabia's mother Irene was the daughter of the Byzantine Emperor Isaac II Angelos and sister of the Emperor Alexios IV Angelos. Alfonso's aunt Berenguela became the second wife of the Emperor Jean, and their daughter Marie became the wife of Emperor Baldwin II. See Wolff, "Mortgage and Redemption of an Emperor's Son," pp. 45-84; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 55-56, 137-40. Jean and Berenguela's sons Alphonse, Louis, and Jean figure in Alfonso X's privilegios rodados as vassals of the king from 1255 to 1270 (Alphonse) or 1274.

16. The basis is implied in passages such as these from Espéculo MS, 1:1.6: when the laws are obeyed, "amuchigua-sse el pueblo, & acreçenta-sse el ssen-nono'; "Los vassallos . . . & los naturales . . . deuen punnar acreçentarlo & en deffenderlo," i.e., "el ssennorio" (2:6.1; cf. 2:11.2; 3:5.6; Setenario, 20:20-23).

17. Antonio Ballesteros and Pío Ballesteros Alava, "Alfonso X de Castilla y la corona de Alemania," RABM, 3a época, 37 (1916), pp. 1-23, 187-219, 223-42; 39 (1918), pp. 142-62; 40 (1919), pp. 467-90. Ballesteros, Alfonso X emperador, and his Alfonso X, pp. 177-89, 213-36, 240-43, 284-89, 332-45, 409-16, 454-75, 486, 489, 536-44, 674-77, 687. 706-32, 769-74, 778-79. Despite papal efforts to discourage him, Alfonso continued to use the title Rex Romanorum as late as 1281 (Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 933, 936). Interesting for its incongruity with the course of events is Alfonso's reported conferral of knighthood on Rudolf (1257), when the latter accompanied an embassy to Castile.

18. Speaking of the nobles especially, Alfonso writes (1273) to the Infante Fernando de la Cerda that "todas las cosas porque me yo movia a facer lo que ellos querian, tiranlas ende, senaladamente la ida del Imperio, que es lo mas." See Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, bk. 5, chap. 20; Cr6nica de Alfonso, chap. 52.

19. Georges Daumet, Memoire sur les relations de la France et de la Castille de 1255 à 1320 (Paris 1913), pp. 1-9.

20. Ibid., pp. 10-16, 149-56. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 479-89. Procter, Curia and Cortes, p. 132. The law excluding women from the succession in France had not yet been established. The negotiations over Berenguela's betrothal were carried on early in 1255; Fernando de la Cerda was not born until fall (23 October).

21. Alfonso excluded his remaining sons from the sennorio mayor because they were adherents of Sancho. The Spanish version of the testament in MHE, vol. 2, no. 228, is dated 8 November 1283; but the Latin translation made for the king of France gives the year as 1282. Georges Daumet, "Les testa ments d'Alphonse X" (see above, chap. 3, n. 64), p. 86. The accuracy of 1282 is supported by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 1000 (a typographical error repeats "1283" before the phrase "cayó en domingo") and 1006; he also notes that the month may be October (p. 992). The link with France appears again in the testament of January 1284: "Francia sienpre servio a la iglesia en todos los grandes fechos que ovo menester, demas que ninguno non puede dezir con derecho, por que somos de un linage de luengo tiempo et de cerca" (MHE, vol. 2, no. 229). The Navarrese question, involving Aragon as well, arose over dynastic claims; it resulted in strained relations between Castile and Aragon during the periods 1254-56 and 1272-81. Castile withdrew from the picture when the Infante Sancho surrendered his rights to James's son King Peter of Aragon. In 1274 Alfonso had renounced his claim in favor of Fernando de la Cerda. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 96-99, 128, 146-53, 558-59, 577-79, 697-706, 793-801, 804-6, 939-40. Daumet, Relations, pp. 173-74.

22. Alfonso was very much aware of the peninsular imperial institution, however ephemeral it may appear to modern historians. The city of his birth, Toledo, he notes, "fue en tienpo de los godos cabeça de Espanna et o antiguament los emperadores se coronauan" (Ballesteros, Alfonso X emperador, p. 73, citing a document dated 13 April 1274). Cf. the reference in Setenario (19. 3-4) to Seville as "antiguamiente casa e morada de los enperadores, e y se coronauan." He was familiar with the imperial style of his ancestor, Alfonso VII (Setenario, 22:3-6; cf. PCG, chap. 974). He also claims that his father had been encouraged to institute an imperial regime but that Fernando had rejected the idea as premature (Setenario, 22:8-10). References to enperador in the Espéculo appear by their character to refer to a peninsular affiliation, i.e., to the emperor simply as another grant ssennor with a different title (see above, n. 10), rather than to universal empire, including the Holy Roman Empire. Alfonso's ideas about the two, however, are not to be confused. James's suspicions appear in a letter dated 1259 (MHE, vol. 1, no. 69); other evidence is adduced to support the basis for his concern by José Iturmendi Morales, "En torno a la idea de imperio en Alfonso X el Sabio," REP 143-45, no. 182 (1972).

23. For Portuguese-Castilian relations see "Biografías de San Fernando y de Alfonso el Sabio por Gil de Zamora," ed. Fidel Fita, BRAH 5 (1884), p. 320. Ballesteros, "Itinerario," BAH 104 (1934), p. 59, n. 1; 105 (1934), p. 529, n. 1; 106 (1935), p. 135, n. 1; 107 (1935), pp. 383, 386, 400-2, 415, 417; 108 ('936), p. 38; 109 (1936), pp. 442, 444, 447, 450, 456. Amalio Huarte y Echenique, "Catálogo de documentos relacionados con la historia de España," BAH 107 (1935), pp. 800-4; '°8 (1936), p. 303, González, Repartimiento de Sevilla (see above, chap. 3, n. 3), vol. 1, pp. 85-89. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 74-77, 376-78, 420-25, 906-8, 940. Florentine Pérez-Ernbid, La frontera entre los reinos de Sevilla y Portugal (Seville 1975), pp. 17-72.

24. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 111-20, 150-51. MHE, vol. 1, nos. 57, 58. No reference to this period appears in the chronicle attributed to James I.

25. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 115. Alfonso García-Gallo, "El derecho de sucesión del trono en la Corona de Aragón," AHDE  36 (1966), pp. 27-31.

26. Llibre dels feyts, pp. 154, 156, 357. Burns, "Spiritual Life of James the Conqueror," pp. 13-14. 26-27.

27. Llibre dels feyts, chaps. 378, 456, 476-81, 494-502, 506-9, 522-23, 545-46 549, 552. Valls Taberner, "Relacions," pp. 280-306. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 254-55, 388-403, 445-54, 483-84, 492-97, 545-46, 668-71, 717-28, 771, 775-76 (on James I); pp. 795, 848-50, 857 (on Peter). See also below, p. 193.

28. PCG, chap. 1037.

29. Dufourcq, "Projet castillan," pp. 27-36. See also Atanasio López, Obispos en el Africa septentrional desde el siglo XIII (Tangier [1920] 1941), pp. 34, 35, 51; and his "La question de Ceuta au XIIIe siècle," Hespéris 42 (1955), PP- 77- 80. Florentine Pérez-Embid, "La marina real castellana en el siglo XIII," AEM 6 (1969), pp. 141-71. MHE, vol. 1, no. 72, which expresses James's attitude. Alfonso as a Christian king formulates his official and theoretically based policy toward non-Christians in Espéculo MS, 3:5. prólogo: "deuemos todos guerrear contra erejes & con moros & con todos los otros que sson henemjgos de Ssanta Eglesia o que non sson de nuestra Ffe."

30. Antonio Ballesteros, "La toma de Salé en tiempos de Alfonso X el Sabio," Al-Andalus 8 (1943), pp. 98, 102-6, must be supplemented by Ambrosio Huici Miranda, "La toma de Salé por la escuadra de Alfonso X," Hésperis 39 (1952), pp. 41-74. See also Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 274-84; and Dufourcq, "Projet castillan," pp. 37-40. A brief, unannotated but useful survey of Castilian-Marinid relations during Alfonso's reign is available in Jamil Abun-Nasr, A History of the Maghrib (Cambridge 1975), pp. 122-26.

31. Dufourcq, "Projet castillan," p. 40, 45-46. Juan Torres Fontes, "La orden de Santa María de España,"MMM 3 (1977), pp. 73-118, deals with this order (1272-81) founded by Alfonso X for war against the Muslims by sea. Its efforts all but ended, following destruction of the Castilian fleet (1279) besieging the Marinids in Algeciras.

32. Alfonso X, General estoria, ed. A. G. Solalinde et al., 2 vols. (Madrid 1930-57), vol. 1, bk. 2, chap. 29: "e en quanto los dexaremos delos non combater e non fazer sobrellos esto, o es por nuestra mesura o por uentura por lo non tener guisado, por que son ellos muchos."

33. Cristóbal Torres Delgado, El antiguo reino nazarí de Granada (1232-1340) (Granada 1974), p. 152. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 84-85. The possible connection between the Muslim rejection of Alfonsine rule during this period (1252-55?) and the king's military activity against peninsular Muslims at the end of the decade has not been outlined clearly. Perhaps in 1260 and certainly by 1263, Cádiz (taken by Fernando III but subsequently lost) was reoccupied. Hipólito Sancho de Sopranis gives the earlier date in "La incorporación de Cádiz a la corona de Castilla bajo Alfonso X," Hispania 9 (1949), pp. 351, 357, 378. The earliest extant royal document addressed to the city is dated 2 March 1263. Ballesteros, "Itinerario," vol. 107, p. 382. See also González, Repartimiento de Sevilla, vol. 1, p. 82. In 1262 Niebla, the capital of al-Gharb, capitulated after a long siege; its deposed ruler was pensioned in Seville, and the territory was annexed to Alfonso's dominions. Gonzalez, Repartimiento de Sevilla, vol. 1, pp. 90-91. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 315-20.

34. Listed as vassals in Alfonsine privilegios rodados are the rulers of Granada (1252-64), Niebla (1253-61), and Murcia (1253-64). The Nasrid, whose kingdom was the only Islamic realm to remain independent after the war of 1264-66, never again was accorded the honor by Alfonso's chancery of being listed among privilegio confirmers.

35. After the fall of Jaén (1246), Muhammad I established the basis for Castilian-Granadan relations for years to come by acknowledging vassalage to Fernando III, agreeing to observe a truce of twenty years' duration and to pay an annual tribute, and obliging himself to attend Cortes in Seville (Torres Delgado, Reino nazarí, pp. 107-8; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 434). For Granada this meant both protection and security while the Nasrid directed his attention to internal problems, to the centralization of peninsular Islamic power under himself, and to dangers from Africa. Muhammad's relations with Fernando III, his contemporary, had been friendlier than those with Alfonso X (Torres, Reino nazarí, pp. 124-27, 147-77). After Abû Yûsuf Ya'qûb's accession (1258) and consolidation of power, and as Muhammad's distrust of Alfonso's plans for crusading in Africa increased, Granadan and Marinid effected a rapprochement (Torres Delgado, Reino nazarí, pp. 157-59). By the time the revolt of the Andalusian Mudejars and Murcian Muslims took place, the twenty years' truce was close to expiring.

36. Alfonso looked upon the war of 1264-66, and later warfare with Granada and the Marinids, as crusade; but all military action took place in the peninsula and adjacent waters, not in Africa. Ballesteros, "Itinerario," vol. 107 (1935 bis), pp. 415, 416; his Alfonso X, pp. 454, 875; and his "Burgos y la rebelión," pp. 133-34. Dufourcq, "Projet castillan," pp. 35 (n. 59), 43, 45.

37. Alfonso's peace in 1265 with Granada did not last; another was concluded in 1268, but it too was fragile (Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 385, 434-35, 454).

38. Llibre dels feyts, chaps. 378, 456. Antonio Ubieto Arteta, "La reconquista de Valencia y Murcia," CHCA X, vol. 1, pp. 164-65. Odilo Engels, "El rey Jaime I de Aragón y la política internacional del siglo XIII," ibid., pp. 233-40, believes that the cordiality between Alfonso and James was superficial, but his arguments are not convincing. Ballesteros, "Itinerario," vol. 108 (1936), pp. 17-37; 109 (1936), pp. 387-405, 428-31, 433-36; his "La reconquista de Murcia 1243-1943," BRAH in (1943), pp. 133-50; and his Alfonso X, chap. 9. Juan Torres Fontes, La reconqúista de Murcia en 1266 for Jaime I de Aragón (Murcia 1967). The intervention of James is ascribed in part to the role played by his daughter, the queen of Castile; with or without her solicitation, he was an old crusader keenly aware of the danger the Islamic offensive posed to Christian rule throughout the peninsula. Abolition of the Islamic kingship in Murcia and the annexation of the protectorate to Castile are dated sometime between June 1266 (MHE, vol. 1, no. 105) and "vers" 1269 (Dufourcq, "Projet castillan," p. 45).

39. In the war of 1264-66 Abû Yûsuf Ya'qûb sent troops into the peninsula, but he himself did not set foot there for another decade. Only after his final triumph in 1269 over domestic enemies could he turn his attention freely to peninsular affairs. Both the Marinid and Alfonso saw Granada as a useful buffer. Granada in turn moved closer to one or the other of them according to perception of the greater danger.

40. I. S. Allouche, "La révolte des Banû Askîlûla centre le sultan nasrite Muhammad II," Hespéris 25 (1938), pp. 4-10. Torres Delgado, Reino nazarí, pp. 135-40, 167-71. M. J. Rubiera de Epalza, "Los Banû Escallola, una dinastía granadina que no fue," Andalucía islámica 2-3 (1981-82), especially pp. 88-93. The arráeces were related by blood or affinity.

41. Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 58, 61. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 681-82, 740-42. Torres Delgado, Reino nazarí, pp. 171-77, 183-85. Muhammad I died 19 January 1273 and was succeeded by his son Muhammad II al-Faqîh, whose accession was assured by the intervention of the Castilian nobles on his behalf.

42. Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 61, 62. Torres Delgado, Reino nazarí, pp. 185-95.

43. Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 69-73. Torres Delgado, Reino nazarí, pp. 195-98. Abû Yûsuf Ya'qûb had occupied Tangier in 1273 and Ceuta in 1274. Ibn Abî Zar', Rawd al-qirtas, ed. Antonio Huici Miranda, 2 vols. (Valencia 1964), vol. 2, pp. 590-91. Dufourcq points out similarities in Castilian policy toward Granada and Africa, making its influence felt directly by diplomacy and indirectly through Christian communities and mercenaries there during the period of preparations for the crusade (1248-60) and even after the campaign failed ("Projet castillan," pp. 28, 30, 35-36, 46, 50-51).

44. Setenario, 16:2-21. Julio González, "Pueblas de Alfonso X en la frontera," in Homenaje a don José María Lacarra de Miguel, 5 vols. (Zaragoza 1977), vol. 3, pp. 7-26. Manuel González Jiménez, En torno a los orígenes de Andalucía: La repoblación del siglo XIII (Sevilla 1980), pp. 37-42.

45.González, Fernando III, vol. 1, p. 418, gives the date as 1251; Alfonso García-Gallo, "Los fueros de Toledo," AHDE 45 (1975), p. 403, gives 1250.

46. Setenario, 21:14-17, 20-23.

47. González, Repartimiento de Sevilla, vol. 1, pp. 242-51. He assigns redaction of the Libro del repartimiento to 1253-58 (pp. 142-44). Ballesteros follows the text of the Libro in reporting that Alfonso approved the repartimiento as of 1 May 1253 (Alfonso X, pp. 78-79).

48. Dates and editions or references for some repartimientos made during Alfonso's reign include the following: Carmona, 1248-53 ("Repartimiento de Carrnona. Estudio y edición," ed. Manuel González Jiménez,HID 8 [1981], pp. 59-84); Niebla, 1262-63 (Julio González, Repartimiento de Sevilla, vol. 1, pp. 57-58); Ecija, 1263 (M. J. Sanz Fuentes, ed., HID 3 [1976], pp. 533-51); Cádiz, 1264, 1268, 1275 (cf. Hipólito Sancho Mayi, Historia del puerto de Santa María [Cádiz 1943], pp. 22-28); Jerez, 1266 (El libra del repartimiento de Jerez de la Frontera--estudio y edición, ed. Manuel González Jiménez and Antonio González Gómez [Cádiz 1980]); Orihuela, three partitions, 1268-75 (cf. J. B.Vilar, Historia de la ciudad de Orihuela, 3 vols. [Orihuela 1976], vol. 2, p. 219); Murcia, 1266 by the Aragonese, three by Alfonso X 1266-72 (Repartimiento de Murcia [Madrid 1960], and Repartimiento de la huerta y campo de Murcia en el siglo XIII [Murcia 1971], both ed. Juan Torres Fontes); Lorca, 1268-70, 1270-72 (Repartimiento de Lorca, ed. Juan Torres Fontes [Lorca 1977]); Campo de Cartagena, 1269 (cf. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, pp. 247-51); Puerto de Santa María, completed 1275 (cf. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 739). See also M. A. Ladero Quesada and Manuel González Jiménez, "La población en la frontera de Gibraltar y el repartimiento de Vejer (siglos XIII y XIV)," HID 4 (1977), pp. 200-9, 262-63; and Manuel González Jiménez, En torno a los orígenes de Andalucia, pp. 143-44.

49. Setenario, 15:24. See also Derek Lomax, La orden de Santiago (1170-1275) (Madrid 1965), chaps. 2, 4, 10. José Rodríguez Molina, "Las órdenes militares de Calatrava y Santiago en el Alto Guadalquivir (siglos XIII-XV)," CEM 2-3 (1974-75), pp. 59-81. An extensive bibliography appears in Lomax, "Las ordenes militares en la península ibérica durante la Edad Media," RHCEE 6 (1976), pp. 9-110.

50. The areas loyal to Alfonso correspond generally to those mentioned in his testament of 1284: Badajoz, Seville, and Murcia. MHE, vol. 2, no. 229. There were pockets of support elsewhere; cf. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, chap. 18.

51. My summary is based on Jesús Lalinde Abadía, Derecho histórico español (Esplugas de Llobregat 1974); José Manuel Pérez-Prendes y Muñoz de Arracó, Curso de histaria del derecho español (Madrid 1973); Bartolomé Clavero, Temas de historia del derecho: derecho común (Seville 1977); and Aquilino Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal, derecho señorial, derecho regio," HID 4 (1977), pp. 115-97.

52. The seventh-century Liber judiciorum was the principal Visigothic collection continuing (but modified) in León, and it was compatible with the short fueros there. Pérez-Prendes, Derecho, pp. 361-63. Enrique Gacto Fernández, Temas de historia del derecho: derecho medieval (Seville 1977), pp. 82-84. Cf. Alfonso García-Gallo, "El fuero de León," AHDE 39 (1969), pp. 5-149, especially pp. 127-41, 147-49; Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal," pp. 123-28, 131-33. A similar situation existed in frontier areas. For León see Pérez-Prendes, Derecho, pp. 363-64, 365-70; E. Gacto, Derecho, pp. 84-88; María Trinidad Gacto Fernández, Estructura de la poblaci6n de la Extremadura leonesa en los siglos XII y XIII (Salamanca 1977), pp. 16-25. For south and east New Castile, fuero origins still evoke discussion. See Pérez-Prendes, Derecho, pp. 371-73; García-Gallo, "Los fueros de Toledo" (see above, n. 45), pp. 450-55; Alberto García Ulecia, Los factores de diferenciaci6n entre las personas en los fueros de la Extremadura castellano-aragonesa (Seville 1975), especially pp. 357-59, 449-52; E. Gacto, Derecho, pp. 92-100. In Toledo an anonymous (between 1155-1274) Latin version of the local fuero was confirmed by Fernando III (1222), and in 1241 granted to Cordova; Fernando ordered the Fuero juzgo translated into Castilian and called the fuero of Cordova. Subsequently both he and Alfonso X granted this text to other cities in Andalusia and the southeast: Cartagena (1246), Seville (see n. 45), Carmona and Alicante (1252), Arcos (1256), Niebla (1263), Orihuela (1265), and Murcia (1266). García-Gallo, "Toledo," pp. 386-88, 401-6, 440-41, 448-49, 456, 485-88. See also Rafael Gibert, "El derecho municipal de León y Castilla," AHDE 21 (1961), pp. 695-753; Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal," p. 130. Foreign communities in Castile were governed by special regulations. Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII (Madrid 1913), pp. 41-50. Ramón Carande, Sevilla, fortaleza y mercado (Seville 1975; originally in AHDE 2 [1926], pp. 70-81). María del Carmen Carlé, "Mercaderes en Castilla (1252-1512)," CHE 21-22 (1954), pp. 231-33. Pérez-Embid, "Navegación y comercio" (see above, chap. 6, n. 45), pp. 54-61. García-Gallo, "Toledo," pp. 427-30. Isidoro González Gallego, "El libro de los privilegios de la nación genovesa," HID 1 (1974), pp. 278, 288-93. José Martínez Gijón, "La jurisdicción marítima en Castilla durante la baja Edad Media," RSB 32 (1974), pp. 347-63. Jews and Muslims were governed by their own religious law in their respective communities.

53. The Libro de los fueros, 307 chapters unsystematically arranged and apparently put together in Burgos by a single author, is made up of Castilian customary law, local privileges, and fazañas. The Fuero viejo, known in the systematized revision of 1356 by a jurist from Burgos, contains material similar to that of the Libro de los fueros. The dates (sometime in the period from ca. 1200 to 1350) of other texts of seignorial fueros are uncertain, and disagreement over them is wide. Recent treatments prefer an early date. Juan García González ("El Fuero viejo asistemático," AHDE 41 [1971], pp. 767- 84) suggests grounds for believing that the unsystematic version may never have existed. See also Bartolomé Clavero, "Behetría, 1255-1356," AHDE 44 (1974), pp. 317-38; Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal," pp. 141, 147-50, 153-54. Summaries and bibliography are found in Pérez-Prendes, Derecho, pp. 387-98, 401-2; E. Gacto, Derecho, pp. 130-37, 152.

54. Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal," pp. 145-46. Iglesia's acceptance of the version given for the origin of Castilian fazañas requires reference to historicity, treated by José María Ramos y Loscertales, "Los jueces de Castilla," CHE  9 (1948), pp. 75-104. On the origin and meaning of fazañas (episodes or narrations containing one or more principles of a juridical nature that served as precedent or norm), see Yakov Malkiel, "Old Spanish 'Fazaña, Pa(s)traña', and 'Past(r)ija,' " Hispanic Review 18 (1950), pp. 135-57, 244-59; José Luis Bermejo, "Fazañas e historiografía," Hispania 32 (1972), pp. 61-76.

55. Lalinde, Derecho, p. 79. For the analogous use of reading and gloss applied in Alfonsine historiography, see Rico, Alfonso el Sabio y la "General estoria," pp. 167-88. Hispanic scholars attended Bologna from the middle of the twelfth century. Between 1300 and 1350 there were more than 150 in civil and canon law; how many returned to the peninsula, and when, remains unknown. Antonio García y García, "La penetración del derecho clásico medieval en España," AHDE 36 (1966), pp. 578-79.

56. Lalinde, Derecho, p. 49. Pérez-Prendes, Derecho, p. 118.

57. Lalinde, Derecho, pp. 48-50, 66. Clavero, Derecho común, pp. 17-18. Pérez-Prendes, Derecho, pp. 422-27, 625-27. Canon law, operative in the peninsula from at least the late third century, was undergoing rapid development. Gratian's Decretum marked a reaction against particularist and decentralizing tendencies in Germanic law that had affected the earlier Hispanic canon (Lalinde, Derecho, p. 94; Antonio García y García, "Derecho canónico," DHEE 2 [1972], p. 7353). Ensuing new collections resulted in the compilation of the Decretales for Gregory IX in 1234. Fernando della Rocca, Manual de derecho canónico, 2 vols. (Madrid 1962), vol. 1, pp. 52-66; Alfonso Prieto, "El proceso de formación del derecho canónico," in Derecho canónico (Pamplona 1975), pp. 117-22. The compiler and editor of the Decretales, the Catalan Dominican Ramon de Penyafort, was visited in Barcelona on his deathbed by Alfonso X and James I during the Christmas season of 1274. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 725. The influence of canon law upon Alfonsine and post-Alfonsine law is extensive; see the abundant bibliography in the works of Antonio García y García in the AHDE, DHEE, and RHCEE, listed by Isaac Vazquez Janeiro, Biobibliografía de Antonio García y García (Santiago de Compostela 1979), pp. 19-45.

58. Pérez-Prendes, Derecbo, p. 435.

59. Lalinde, Derecho, pp. 112-13. Clavero, Derecho común, pp. 26-28. Hilda Grassotti, Las instituciones feudo-vasalláticas en Le6n y Castillo, 2 vols. (Spoleto 1969), vol. 2, pp. 985-86.

60. Primera partida, ed. Juan Antonio Arias Bonet (Valladolid 1975), pp. li, lviii, ci. Alfonso García-Gallo, "Nuevas observaciones sobre la obra legislativa de Alfonso X," AHDE 46 (1976), pp. 618-20.

61. Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal," pp. 134-36, 150.

62. Aside from these longer works of general character, special law either authentically Alfonsine or attributed embraces a variety of works and myriad extant documents. See below, "A Note on the Sources." For the Leyes nuevas and the Leyes del estilo see n. 83.

63. Setenario, 25:19 and 23; 26:2; 46:4. Three manuscripts are described in pp. xliii-liii.

64. Setenario, 9:18-30; 23:8-14, 21-23; 25:8-14 (the mirror simile is here); quotation from 23:21.

65. Setenario, 25:23-27. The clause "et por toller estos ssiete males partio este libro en siete partes" (25:14-15) may refer to treatment of the seven sacraments, although the stated basis for the title is seven "razones prinçipales," only four of which are mentioned (26:3; cf. 26:4, 22; 29:19; 46:4) and treated (47:10), all in ley 11. The count by sevens has not been given adequate attention; cf. Angel Ferrari, "Artificios septenarios en la Cbronica Adefonsi imperatoris y poema de Almería," BRAH 153 (1963), pp. 19-67. One notes the coincidence (?) in the break in Partida 1:4 in the Silense manuscript (cited by Arias Bonet, Primera partida, p. lix) and the breaks in the Setenario at 47:10 and at the end of the text. Vanderford (Setenario, pp. xxxvii-xxxviii) thinks it likely the work was not actually completed, but that Alfonso could in good conscience have considered his duty discharged in view of his own plans for the Partidas, the outline of which is foreseen in allusions in the Setenario (cited by Vanderford, pp. xxvii-xl). Alfonso García-Gallo believes it was finished ("El 'Libro de las leyes' de Alfonso el Sabio," pp. 405-6).

66. Setenario, 25:8-9: "mando el rrey don Fferrando ffazer este libro"; 25.14-17.

67. Setenario, 10:27: "esta obra que el auja començado en su vida."

68. Setenario, 8:13-14: "este libro que nos començamos por mandado del rrey don Ffernando"; 9:3-5.

69. Setenario, 9:11: "ayudamosle a començar en ssu uida."

70. Setenario, 9:6-7: "nos lo mando a ssu ffinamiento"; 10:28.

71. The strength of Alfonso's stated desire (Setenario, 9:10-12; 10:26-27) to carry out his father's request may explain the use of the past tense in another location (25:18-19: "desque ouymos este libro conpuesto e ordenado"), although the latter statement may refer simply to completion of the introduction.

72. Setenario, 69:6: "sé çiertamente." Whether the author of the remark was Fernando or Alfonso is not clear. For incontestable evidence of Alfonso's active participation in the preparation of works bearing his name see A. G. Solalinde, "Intervención de Alfonso X en la redacción de sus obras," RFE 2 (1915), pp. 283-88. Rico (Alfonso, pp. 97-99) discusses a passage in the General estoria (vol. 1, book 16, chap. 14) containing another verb in the first person.

73. Setenario, 68:36: "e nos rrey don Alfonso, que este libro fezimos conponer." Alfonso's second testament, in which he names only two of the works attributed to him, mentions the Libros de los cantares de loor de Sancta Maria and the Setenario. In the Latin translation the text refers to the latter as "ilium librum quern nos fieri fecimus" (Daumet, "Testaments," p. 91); editions of the Spanish version, based ultimately on the lost original, read "que nos fezimos" (MHE, vol. 2, no. 229) and "que nos fecimos" (A. G. Solalinde, Antología de Alfonso X el Sabio [Madrid 1941], p. 236). Daumet believes the reference is to the Siete partidas; and it is possible that the name of the original Setenario, whose content was incorporated into the Partidas, was transferred in Alfonso's own mind to the latter enterprise.

74. Alfonso, while Infante, was in the city in 1250 and 1251; as king (from 1 June 1252) he maintained his court there for much of 1252 and all of 1253, before proceeding north to Castile in January 1254. The absolute terminus a quo for the date of composition of the introduction is 23 November 1248, the date of the capitulation of Seville to Fernando. The terminus ad quem for the introduction (and the principal text?) is 8 December 1253, when the Guadiana River, officially the boundary between Castile and Portugal that year, became the western boundary of the concejo of Seville (González, Repartimiento de Sevilla, vol. 1, pp. 86-87; cf. Setenario, 19:19, on the boundaries of the regno).  Other references that would advance the terminus a quo are to the cathedral (Setenario, 21:4-7), officially dedicated on 11 March 1252 (I.E.F., "Sevilla," DHEE, vol. 4, p. 2447).

75. In granting a fuero to the settlers of Campomayor, Bishop Lorenzo of Badajoz provided for use of "el libro del fuero de los juicios del glorioso e sabio e victorioso Rey D. Alffonso. . . . E este libro quien bien lo catar fallara en el complimiento de lo que a mester, que es como fuente perenal en comparacion de todos los otros que fueron e son en Spagna, e es partido en quatro partes" (MHE, vol. 1, no. 114). The mention of four Books seems to exclude both the Fuero juzgo and Espéculo. Aquilino Iglesia Ferreirós also observes this reference ("Alfonso X el Sabio y su obra legislativa: algunas reflexiones," AHDE 50 [1980], pp. 560-61).

76. I use the text of the Real Academia de la Historia, in Opúsculos legates, vol. 2, pp. 1-169. For a bibliography of editions see Alfonso García-Gallo, "Nuevas observaciones" (see above, chap. 3, n. 6), p. 652, nn. 93-95; for other appellations, pp. 655-66. The manuscripts I am aware of thus far number at least three dozen, none of which emanates from the royal scriptorium of Alfonso X. In the course of publication is a new edition of the Portuguese version by José de Azevedo Ferreira (Braga 1982ff.).

77. Real Academia de la Historia ed., lib. 1, prólogo: "entendiendo que la villa de Valladolit [var.: muchas cibdades e villas de nuestros regnos] non oviera [ovieron] fuero fasta en el nuestro tiempo, e judgabase por fazanas e por alvedrios departidos de los omes, e por usos desaguisados e sin derecho, de que vienen muchos males e muchos dannos a los omes e a los pueblos: et pediendonos merced que los emendasemos los sus usos que fallasemos que eran sin derecho, e que les diesemos fuero porque visquiesen derechamientre de aqui adelante. . . ."

78. Stated or implied for example in Alfonso's Fuero real, ed. Alfredo Pimenta (Lisbon 1946), pp. 6-8; Pérez-Prendes, Derecbo, p. 455; Lalinde, Derecho, p. 72; Alfonso García-Gallo, Manual de historia del derecho español, 2 vols. (Madrid 1979), vol. 1, p. 394; Procter, Curia and Cortes, p. 121.

79. Gonzalo Martínez Díez, "El Fuero Real y el fuero de Soria," AHDE 39 (1969), p. 562, concludes that the fuero of Soria is not a source of the Fuero real, as had been thought previously, and that "lejos de recoger el derecho municipal vigente en un intento de uniformarle y extenderle, se nos presenta mas bien como un primer ensayo erudito, que con el Liber ludiciorum y soluciones romano-canónicas, trata de formar un cuerpo legal que facilitará mas tarde una ulterior y mas total recepción del Derecho común." See also Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal," p. 133.

80. Pérez-Prendes, Derecho, p. 455.

81. Fuero real, lib, 1, prólogo: "oviemos conseio con nuestra corte e con los omes sabidores de derecho."

82. Martínez Marina, Ensayo histórico-crítico, p. 277: "fue acabado y publicado á ultimos del año 1254 ó principio del siguiente." Lalinde, Derecho, p. 72; and García-Gallo, Manual, vol. 1, p. 394: "redactado entre 1252 y 1255." In his revised hypothesis García-Gallo ("Nuevas observaciones," pp. 654-61, 664-67) suggests that the Fuero real, the composition of which may go back possibly as far as 1260, does not appear to be mentioned before 1274, although from 1293 it is cited constantly. In contrast see above, n. 75, and an inference drawn by Antonio García y García, "Obras de derecho común medieval en castellano," AHDE 41 (1971), p. 680, n. 41. Jerry Craddock, adducing philological criteria, believes the Fuero real was completed 25 August 1255 ("La cronología de las obras legislativas de Alfonso X el Sabio," AHDE 51 [1981], p. 418).

83. The Leyes nuevas and the Leyes del estilo have often been considered along with the Fuero real. The Real Academia de la Historia published both compilations, under the impression that they comprised unique collections on questions or disputes arising from attempts to interpret the Fuero real. In fact they are nonroyal, unsystematic collections of royal decisions, judgments, and clarifications, not all by Alfonso X nor all related to the Fuero real.The Leyes nuevas que fizo el rey despues que fizo el fuero is the title in the Academy's edition of 1836. Base manuscripts are Catedral de Toledo 43-22, and Escorial Z.3.13 (text in Opúsculos legales, vol. 2, pp. 181-209). The collection is found in over a dozen manuscripts. The items arranged in the Academy's edition consist of a letter on usury, datable to 1260 (Procter, Curia and Cortes, pp. 144-45), twenty-nine leyes responding to questions posed by the alcaldes of Burgos, ten miscellaneous treatments of civil matters and trial procedures, and seven dated royal letters on various subjects. Six of the royal letters are Alfonsine (two from 1263, one from 1268, one from 1278, two from 1279) while the other (1295) dates from the end of Sancho IV's reign. Some of these dates have been verified and others amended as the result of finding dated documents containing the original or similar texts. I have listed the revised dates, based on Ballesteros, "Itinerario," vol. 107 (1935), pp. 389-90; his "Burgos y la rebelión," pp. 110, 137; and Procter. The earliest grouping of documents in the collection is placed tentatively between 1265 and 1278, with some added later (José López Ortiz, "La colección conocida con el título 'Leyes nuevas' y atribuida a Alfonso X el Sabio," AHDE 16 [1945], pp. 52, 55-56, 58). The Leyes del estilo, known also as the Declaraciones de las leyes del fuero in the Academy's edition (Opúscules legales, vol. 2, pp. 235-352), based on what appeared to the editors to be the first edition (date not specified), have accompanied the Fuero real because many or most of the 252 leyes serve to interpret and clarify its provisions. Other leyes treat other texts (e.g., the Decretales, nos. 59, 192; the Ordenamiento of Zamora, no. 91; the Setena partida, no. 164) or constitute miscellaneous individual juridical actions (e.g., no. 198). García-Gallo calls the collection post-Alfonsine ("Nuevas observaciones," p-665). If it had been put together at one time, some readily datable references embrace the period from 1290 to 1309. García-Gallo regards the collection as basically "la costumbre de la Corte de los Reyes de Castilla," with extraneous texts inserted. The collection is found in five or six manuscripts.

84. Espéculo MS, the prólogo; "entendiendo & veyendo los males que nasçen & sse leuantan en las tierras & en los nuestros rregnos por los muchos ffueros que eran en las villas & en las tierras departidas en muchas maneras--que los vnos sse julgauan por ffueros de libros mjnguados & non conplidos, & los otros sse judgan por ffazanas dessaguissadas & ssin derecho; et los que aquelos libros mjnguados tenjen por que sse judgauan, algunos rrayen-los & camjauan-los como ellos sse querian, a pro de ssi & a danno de los pueblos: onde por todas estas rrazones sse mjnguaua la justiçia & el derecho por que los que aujen de judgar non podian çiertamjente njn conplidamjente dar los juyzios, & los que rreçebien el danno non podien auer derecho assi como deujen, . . . catamos & escogiemos de todos los ffueros lo que mas valie & lo meior, & pussiemos lo y, tan bien del Ffuero de Castiella como de Leon como de los otros logares que Nos ffallamos que eran derechos & con rrazon, non olujdando el derecho por que es pertenesçiente a esto." Does the "Ffuero de Castiella" refer to the Fuero real or to a territorial compilation? The fuero of León no doubt is the version of the Liber judiciorum operative there. It must be the latter, whether in its original or a revised form, that is understood when legal unity--Alfonso's goal--is ascribed to the Visigothic model (Espéculo MS, 5:5.1). Internal remarks (1:1.7; cf. 4:2.10) view the Espéculo as a book (libro) of written prescriptions conducive to lawful conduct and justice (leyes) that are intended to be adopted as custom (fuero). As such, the Espéculo is contrasted with other fueros (4:4.7; 5:6.6). The first printed edition is the Academy's in Opúscules legales, where it makes up volume 1. My edition of the two known medieval codices extant awaits completion of the glossary and indices.

85. Pérez-Prendes, Derecho, p. 482. García-Gallo, "Nuevas observaciones," pp. 649-50.

86. The work shows a pattern of increasing complexity and sophistication throughout; my edition will consider such details.

87. Cf. Espéculo MS, 5:13.141 "a la corte del rrey vienen a menudo los mas onrrados et los mas ssabios de la tierra con quien a el rrey ssus consseios et ssus acuerdos ssobre los pleitos et los juyzios que vienen antel. Et avn y a al: que aquellos que cutianamjente estan en casa del rrey vsan mas los pleitos et entienden mas las cosas de que sse agraujan los de la tierra."

88. García-Gallo, for example, suggests extremes of 1255 and 1258 ("Nuevas observaciones," p. 664).

89. For the Leyes del estilo (no later than the reign of Fernando IV, 1295-1312), see n. 83. A bibliography on the Partidas is provided by John Vance for the English translation of Las Siete partidas, trans. Samuel Parsons Scott (Chicago 1931), pp. lxxviii-xcvii. See also García-Gallo, "Libro de las leyes," pp. 350-59, and on the title pp. 390-91, 418; his "Nuevas observaciones," pp. 610-11; my "Progress and Problems in Editing Alfonsine Juridical Texts," La corónica 6 (1978), p. 78 and nn. 1,9, 12, 13; and the expected bibliography by Craddock. I can cite at least seventy manuscripts that contain a significant part of one Partida or more. At least two dozen fragments are also known. Doubtless more of each type exist. The text of the major manuscripts in Portuguese recently became easily accessible through the doctoral thesis of Alexander F. Caskey, "An Edition, Study, and Glossary of the Old Portuguese Translations of Partidas I and III of the Alfonsine Siete partidas," 4 vols. (Ann Arbor [University Microfilms] 1981), and the edition by José de Azevedo Ferreira of the Primera partida (Braga 1980).

90. Primera partida, 1975 ed. (see above, n. 60), p. 4. I reviewed the edition from the philologist's standpoint in Romance Philology 33 (1980), pp. 444-48. See, too, in microfiche: Concordances and Texts of the Royal Scriptorium Manuscripts of Alfonso X, el Sabio, ed. Lloyd Kasten and John Nitti (Madison 1978), "El libro de las leyes." British Library Ms. Add. 20787 in recent times has been dated variously from around 1275 to 1312, with most support for the period 1290-1300 (García-Gallo, "Nuevas observaciones," pp. 614-17). But as Arias Bonet notes in his edition (p. cii), and as Antonio García y García had stated earlier ("Un nuevo códice de la Primera partida de Alfonso X el Sabio,"AHDE 33 [1963], p. 282), the oldest manuscript does not necessarily contain the oldest text. J. H. Herriott, its first modern transcriber, whose completed edition was not published, believed the codex contains the oldest manuscript and the oldest text, although he was willing to shift from a date in Alfonso's reign to one in Sancho's ("A Thirteenth-Century Manuscript of the Primera Partida" Speculum 13 [1938], pp. 286-87; García-Gallo, " 'Libro de las leyes,'" p. 361, n. 35).

91. For example, in Partida 1:4.65.

92. Lalinde, Derecho, p. 113. Antonio Pérez Martín in a forthcoming study, "Murcia y la obra legislativa alfonsina: pasado y presente," ascribes leadership in executing the project to Maestre Jacobo Junta.

93. Concerning the manuscript tradition and textual amendment in the history of the Partidas, García y García points out the analogy of the obvious dynamic process to developments in the history of canon-law editing ("Un nuevo codice," pp. 334-36).

94. These generalizations are based on the hypotheses of García-Gallo cited in nn. 96 and 97. They appear to be widely accepted. On the date of composition of the Partidas, see n. 101. For promulgation of the Partidas in 1348, see the text of the Ordenamiento of Alcalá in Los códigos españoles concordados y anotados, 12 vols. (Madrid 1847-51), vol. 1, p. 463 (28.1).

95. García-Gallo, "Nuevas observaciones," p. 649. The first version in print officially recognized by the government was the López edition of 1555: Las Siete partidas del sabio rey don Alfonso el nono, ed. Gregorio López, 3 vols. ([Salamanca 1555]; Madrid 1974); cf. the 1807 edition above in chap. 3, n. 12.

96. Alfonso García-Gallo, "Libra de las leyes," pp. 345-528; cf. his Manual, vol. 1, pp. 392-400. The hypothesis owes much to the work, acknowledged, of other scholars.

97. García-Gallo, "Nuevas observaciones" (see above, chap. 3, n. 6), pp. 609-70. For the later development of precedence of codes in force see Bartolomé Clavero, "Notas sobre el derecho territorial castellano, 1367-1445," HID  3 (1976), pp. 143-49.

98. Beginning in July 1254, approximately six months after Alfonso's arrival from Andalusia, the king bestowed fueros upon several communities, mainly in Castile. From 18 through 27 July 1256 alone, he granted fueros to towns in Old Castile on ten known occasions. According to historians, eight (perhaps nine) of these ten grants are of the Fuero real. Cf. Ballesteros, "Itinerario," for 1254: vol. 104 (1934), pp. 478-79, 484, 488, 489; for 1255: vol. 105 (1934), pp. 123, 129, 142, 143, 145; for 1256: vol. 105, pp. 164, 166, 175; for 18-27 July 1256: vol. 105, pp. 176-78. The question arises as to whether the fuero granted on those occasions was the Fuero real, the Espéculo, or now one and now the other, because no specific title is encountered in the privileges of grant. The formula used in the instrument of conferral reads: "doles et otorgoles aquel fuero que yo fiz con consejo de mi corte escripto en libro et sellado con mio seello de plomo." From the July 1256 group, six texts readily accessible to me are identical in this wording: Gabriel Llobrés, "El fuero de Trujillo," Revista de Extremadura 3 (1901), 489-97; Francisco Layna Serrano, Historia de la villa de Atienza (Madrid 1945), pp. 503-4; MHE, vol. 1, nos. 43-45; Colección diplomática de Cuéllar (see above, chap. 3, n. 43), no. 16. The fuero of Palencia, translated from Latin into Romance, contains provisions added by Alfonso X (18 July 1256), one of which reads: "que todas las otras cosas que acaesçieren en la çibdat de Palencia que non scan aqui escriptas que se judguen por las leyes del nuestro libro que les damos escripto et sellado con nuestro sello de plomo" (Carmen Caamaño, "El fuero romanceado de Palencia," AHDE 11 [1934], p. 520). Similar language is used in the grant to Sahagún earlier (25 April 1255): "que todas las otras cosas que aqui no son escritas que las iuzguen todos los de S. Fagund christianos et judios et moros por a siempre por el otro fuero que les damos en un libro escrito et sellado con nuestro seello de plomo" (A. M. Barrero García, "Los fueros de Sahagún," AHDE 42 [1972], p. 597). The only part of this formula expressed in the Fuero real, in the Academy's base text, is the reference to the court, to which is added the phrase "et con los omes sabidores de derecho." The text of the Espéculo MS, on the other hand, states that to each town is given a copy, with leaden seal, of a book "que ffeziemos con consseio & con acuerdo de los arcobispos & de los obispos de Dios, & de los rricos omnes, & de los mas onrrados ssabidores de derecho que podiemos auer & ffallar" (prólogos). Whereas the Academy's base addresses the Fuero real to Valladolid, many of the codices containing its text use a generalized prologue directed to "muchas cibdades e villas de nuestros regnos" (Opúscules legales, vol. 2, p. 6, n. 4), a possible sign that the text had become the object of study and revision by scholars after the code had been granted in its original, official form. This independent attention may also explain the absence of other specific enabling provisions that differentiate the wording in the prologues of the Fuero real and Espéculo, although such provisions could have been included in the accompanying official instrument of conferral.

99. Regardless of whether the Espéculo or the Fuero real was the code superseded in 1272, Alfonso declared his willingness to use the "fuero antiguo" in conferring with the nobles, when he met them in the glera outside Burgos in September (?) 1272 (Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 24). The prologue to the Fuero Viejo (revision of 1356) reports that the Alfonsine "fuero del libro" was in force until November of the same year (Clavero, "Behetría," p. 324). With reference to the towns, Alfonso in a letter to Miranda, dated 26 September 1272, already was validating use of the "fuero que ouieren en tiempo del rrey don Ffernando nuestro padre e del rrey don Alffonso" without really abrogating his own code (Francisco Cantera Burgos, "Miranda en tiempo de Alfonso el Sabio," Boletín de la Comisión provincial de monumentos históricos y artísticos de Burgos, año 17 [1938], doc. 4; see below, n. 117, for other examples). Earlier evidence of dissatisfaction over the king's codification is attested in Ballesteros, "Itinerario," vol. 107 (1935), p. 59 and n. i: "el Conceio de Miranda me enuiaron dezir que se agrauiauan del Libro del ffuero nueuo que les yo diera . . . que non entienden el Libro" (31 July 1262); and Joaquín Joseph de Landázuri y Romarate, Historia civil, eclesiástica, política, y legislativa . . . de Victoria (Vitoria [1780] 1929), p. 376: "aquellas cosas que fallasedes en el libro de [que] vos agraviasedes" (14 April 1271). The return to the old fueros was granted to the rest of the Castilians and to the Leonese in 1273 (Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 40, 47, 54, 58).

100. For the Fuero real see above, nn. 75 and 82, and Iglesia Ferreirós, "Cortes de Zamora," pp. 945-71, especially p. 947. In "Derecho municipal," pp. 145-46, Iglesia assumes early promulgation of the Fuero real in Castile as the means of overcoming the strength and operation of the municipal fueros and the fazañas.

101. Both Arias Bonet (restricting his comments to the Primera partida in his introduction, pp. xlix-lix, ci-ciii) and Iglesia Ferreirós ("Alfonso X el Sabio," pp. 557, 559-60) place the early redaction(s) of the Partida(s) unequivocally within Alfonso's reign. Iglesia (p. 560) attributes significance to the date of composition stated in the prologue in the British Library manuscript (1256-65; 1263 is a typographical error), because the codex comes from the royal scriptorium regardless of the reign and therefore cannot truly be suspected of having been falsified. (On the dates see also Jerry Craddock, "La nota cronológica inserta en el prólogo de las 'Siete partidas,' " Al-Andalus 39 [1974], pp. 363-90). It may be worth noting that some of the early manuscripts of the Fuero real and the Siete partidas exist in peninsular languages (Portuguese, Galician, Catalan) other than Castilian, while the extant manuscripts of the Setenario and Espéculo are in Castilian only. Although various interpretations of this situation are possible, it seems to me that the translations represent the dissemination of texts of broad application fitting into, and compatible with, plans developing outside Castile.

102. Iglesia Ferreirós, "Cortes de Zamora," pp. 947, 953, 957-58; and his "Alfonso," p. 560. Evidence from other sources lends support to the belief that the election, including preliminary contacts, influenced the course of Alfonso's legal program. Accepting the date 1256 for beginning work on the Partidas, wider interest in--and perhaps easier access to--scholarship in Roman and canon law accounts for the expansion in scope of the legal project. The revival of hegemonist pretensions in the peninsula may have been an offshoot of the earlier imperial campaign; one recalls James's expression of opposition to these Alfonsine ambitions. An interesting stylistic detail from the period is a change dating from 1257: "Yo" in concessions of fuero (see n. 97) becomes the more imposing "Nos." While this rewording may have resulted only from the king's or the chancery's decision to reflect emphasis on an institutional royal authority, rather than on Alfonso's personal intervention, the timing seems significant.

103. García-Gallo, "Nuevas observaciones," pp. 657, 667-70.

104. García-Gallo, "Libro de las leyes," pp. 450-51. The necessity is reiterated by García y García ("Un nuevo códice," pp. 334-36) and presented anew in my "Editing Alfonsine Juridical Texts," pp. 78-79, and my article to appear in the 1984 volume of the AHDE with the tentative title "Problemas políticas y el derecho alfonsino desde tres puntos de vista."

105. For general remarks about the nobility of the time, see for example Salvador de Moxó, Estudios sobre la sociedad castettana en la baja Edad Media (Madrid 1969), especially pp. 33-210; his Repoblación y sociedad en la España medieval (Madrid 1979), pp. 387-95, 401-13, 426-30; and Angel Ferrari, "Testimonies retrospectivos sobre el feudalismo castellano en El Libro de las Behetrías," BRAH 172 (1975), pp. 7-119, 281-404.

106. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 21-37.

107. Ibid., pp. 105-7, 114. Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 30. Diego López, the king's alférez, was lord of Vizcaya and the premier lay noble.

108. Gil de Zamora in Fita, "Biografías," pp. 322, 325. González, Repartimiento de Sevilla, vol. 1, pp. 69-70, 247-48. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 108-20, 262-70, 460-75. Enrique had refused in 1246 to do homage to Alfonso as heir and successor to Fernando III. According to Ballesteros, a reconciliation seems to have been effected by 1268, while Enrique was in prison abroad.

109. Fadrique was back in Castile by March 1272, counseling the king during the early phase of the nobles' conspiracy (Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 23, 24; Gil de Zamora in Fita, "Biografías," p. 322). Five years later Alfonso had Fadrique executed, possibly for involvement in a plot over the succession (Loaysa, Crónica [see above, chap. 3, n. 46], chap. 23; "Anales toledanos III," ed. Antonio Floriano, CHE 43-44 [1967], p. 173; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 270-72, 818-27; González, Fernando III, vol. 2, 107-9).

110. For the rebellion in the period 1269-71, see Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 18, 20. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 490-92, 517-34. Dates used in this paper for material from the Crónica de Alfonso are based on the chronology established by Ballesteros, with precedence given to Alfonso X and then to the "Itinerario."

111. Don Felipe, ill-suited to the ecclesiastical vocation (archbishop-elect of Seville, abbot of Valladolid and Covarrubias), reentered the secular state in 1258 and eventually married three times (J. P. de Guzmán y Gallo, "La princesa Cristina de Noruega y el infante Don Felipe, hermano de don Alfonso el Sabio," BRAH 74 [1919], pp. 39-65; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 192-99, 525-26, 682; González, Fernando III, vol. 1, pp. 110-12). It is not clear why Felipe consented to lead the malcontents, except that as a rico hombre he felt his interests were closer to those of other nobles than to those of the king.

112. For 1272 see Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 21-36. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 556-59, 562-615, especially pp. 572, 574, 580-81, 584-85. The petitions in Burgos enumerated political concerns (the fueros, office of merino, and founding of new towns in Castile), judicial (the social rank of judges in the royal court), financial (dealing with the tithe and the service obligation), and private personal matters. For new towns established in the north, see J. I. Ignacio Ruiz de la Peña, "Poblamientos y cartas pueblas de Alfonso X y Sancho IV en Galicia," Homenaje a Lacarra, vol. 3, pp. 27-51, and his Las "polas" asturianas en la Edad Media (Oviedo 1981), pp. 60-63; and Eloy Benito Ruano, "El desarrollo urbano de Asturias en la Edad Media: ciudades y 'polas,' " in Villes de l'Europe méditerranéenne et de l'Europe occidentale du moyen âge au XlXe-siècle (Nice 1969), pp. 43-45. The nobles, reacting sharply, clearly feared the rise of a new competitive power in the form of the town. Cf. Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal," pp. 129-30, who sees the 1272 redaction of the Fuero viejo de Castilla as the nobles' response to the Alfonsine attack on nobiliary privileges. Because the compilation had never received official sanction, an attempt was made in its prologue to strengthen the Fuero's position by falsely presenting the work as official (pp. 142-46, 154-55). Clavero, "Behetría," p. 326, believes the return was to the Fuero real and not to the Fuero viejo. In looking at the nobles' position from another angle, Antonio Ubieto Arteta (Ciclos económicos en la Edad Media española [Valencia 1969], p. 138) views the regulations governing the Mesta as evidence of the victory of livestock-raising over agriculture, "protegiendo una vez más a los grupos nobiliarios." The date of the laws, which Ubieto gives as 1272, assumes more significance in light of other concessions Alfonso made in 1272-73. The king's chief negotiators with the nobles during this period were the queen's brother, Archbishop Sancho of Toledo, and the king's brother, the Infante Manuel. At the Cortes the king was approached separately by the prelates, but the content of their petitions is not known. See Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 26; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 583-86; O'Callaghan, "Cortes and Royal Taxation," pp. 386-87; and above, n. 13.

113. Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 40. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 620-21, 623-25.

114. Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 47, 50. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 637-41, 646.

115. Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 54. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 660-64, 666-68. After the Master of Calatrava, acting for the young Infante Fernando, had attempted to settle matters in a way that displeased the king (the occasion gave rise to the famous letter from Alfonso to the Infante), Alfonso sent the queen to act jointly with their son in bringing negotiations to a successful conclusion at Cordova during the summer.

116. For 1273 see Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 37-58; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 615-68, 677-82. As early as July, Alfonso had given his assent in a letter to his emissary to the exiles. The king's formal consent came at the Cortes in Seville in mid-December 1273, according to the Crónica (chap. 58) and to Ballesteros (pp. 680-82); Procter, Curia and Cortes, says nothing about the Cortes. Alfonso never officially abrogated or revoked his code in so many words. Confirming the old fueros and privileges resulted in supersedure. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 732, believes that Alfonso resorted to a similar face-saving tactic in his conversations with the pope at Beaucaire, over giving up his claim to the imperial crown.

117. Exemplified in concessions to Miranda on 26 September 1272 (Fuero de Miranda de Ebro, ed. Francisco Cantera Burgos [Madrid 1945], p. 151; see above, n. 98); at Madrid on 26 October (Documentos de Madrid, vol. 1, pp. 113-14); and at Sepúlveda on 31 October (Fueros de Sepúlveda: see above, chap. 3, n. 28; pp. 196-97). O'Callaghan believes that this political concession was traded for a financial concession from the towns ("Cortes and Royal Taxation," pp. 387-89, 397).

118. In Seville, December 1273, see Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 58; and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 681-82.

119. Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 55-56, 59.

120. M. A. Pérez de la Canal, "La justicia de la corte en Castilla durante los siglos XIII al XV," HID 2 (1975), pp. 397, 419-21. Iglesia Ferreirós views this Ordenamiento (ordinarily a means by which the king could modify municipal law), despite the apparent restriction on royal authority, as an Alfonsine triumph because the king achieved general recognition of some of his law. This victory becomes implicit in the Leyes del estilo. Notwithstanding the setbacks at Burgos and Seville, time gradually favored imposition of royal law, the process culminating in promulgation of the Ordenamiento of Alcala in 1348. (See his "Derecho municipal," pp. 137-40).

121. Loaysa, Crónica, chaps. 11-18. Crónica de Alfonso, chaps. 61-63. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, chap. 15. "Anales toledanos III," p. 173.

122. Loaysa, Crónica, chap. 12. Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 64. The elder son, Alfonso de la Cerda, was five years old.

123. Crónica de Alfonso, chap. 65.

124. Loaysa, Crónica, chaps. 19-21. Procter, Curia and Cortes, pp. 139-43. "Anales toledanos III," p. 173, reports the homage but does not mention the Cortes.

125. Ballesteros cannot explain why (Alfonso X, pp. 802-3). Daumet, Relations, pp. 30-33, 157-59.

126. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 793-801, 804-6, 842-48. Daumet, Relations, pp. 27-47, 53-71, 157-72.

127. Loaysa, Crónica, chaps. 21-24. The nobles did not hesitate to use the issue to advance their own interests once more, even without Sancho's knowledge (Ballesteros, "Burgos y la rebelión," pp. 138-40, 145, 191).

128. Fuero juzgo en latín y castellano, ed. Real Academia de la Historia (Madrid 1815), 4:2.iii: "Quando non es nenguna persona del linaie que venga derechamientre de suso, o de yuso, devenlo aver los que vienen de travieso mas propinquos." Cf. Leges visigothorum, ed. Karolus Zeumer (Hanover and Leipzig 1902): "Quando supradicte persone desunt, que aut de superiori aut de inferiori genere discrete ordine veniunt, tune ille persone, que sum a latere constitute, requirantur, ut hereditatem accipiant." To this Forma Reccessvindiana the Forma Ervigiana adds: "defuncti, qui intestatus discesserit." See "Liber iudiciorum," 4:2.iii; Espéculo MS, 2:16.1: "el ffijo mayor del rrey es heredero por derecho"; 2:16.3: "Pero ssi ffijo, o ffija, o njeto, o njeta o heredero non oviere y que desçenda de la linna derecha que herede el rregno, tomen por ssennor al hermano mayor del rrey. Et ssi hermano mayor y nonoviere, tomen al mas propinco pariente que oujere" (cf. 4:12.13). See also n. 130.

129. Loaysa, Crónica, chap. 20. Mercedes Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Historia del reinado de Sancho IV de Castillo, 3 vols. (Madrid 1922-28), vol. 1, pp. 5-6.

130. According to Alfonso, "despues de la muerte de Don Fernando, nuestro fijo mayor, como quier que el fijo que el dexase de su muger de bendicion si el vezquiera mas que nos, por derecho deve heredar lo suyo asi como lo devia de heredar el padre: mas pues que Dios que saliese del medio que era linea derecha por do descendia el derecho de nos a los sus fijos; nos, catando el derecho antiguo e la ley de razon segund la ley de España, otorgamos et concedimos a Don Sancho, nuestro fijo mayor, que lo oviese en lugar de Don Fernando, nuestro fijo mayor, porque era mas llegado por linea derecha que los nuestros nietos, fijos de Don Fernando" (MHE, vol. 1, no. 228). Some time ago I pointed out that the two positions are reflected in different manuscripts containing the text of the Partidas (2:15.2, Academy's edition): "[Los homes sabios et entendudos] posieron que el señorio del regno heredasen siempre aquellos que veniesen por liña derecha. Et por ende establescieron que si fijo varon hi non hobiese, la fija mayor heredase el reno, et aun man-daron que si el fijo mayor moriese ante que heredase, se dexase fijo o fija que hobiese de su muger legitima, que aquel o aquella la hobiese, et non otro ninguno [a variant reading of the words italicized is: si lexare fijo legitimo varon, que aquel lo hobiese; pero si fincare otro fijo varon del rey, que aquel lo herede et non el nieto; et si el fijo mayor non dexase fijo et dexase fija, aquella lo haya, pero si fincare fija del rey, aquella lo herede et non la nieta]; pero si todos estos fallesciesen, debe heredar el regno el mas propinco pariente que hi hobiere seyendo home para ello et non habiendo fecho cosa por que lo debiese perder" (MacDonald, "Alfonso the Learned and Succession: A Father's Dilemma," Speculum 40 [1965], p. 651). I bring up, in the article (in press) cited in n. 104, the problem of the variant manuscript readings and the implications for textual relationships and differing political attitudes.

131. Fidel Fita, "Dos libros (inéditos) de Gil de Zamora," BRAH 5 (1884), p. 146: "usque ad regem Allefonsum in regem Romanorum electum et illustrem Sancium filium eius, qui iam eidem incipit coregnare, sub anno Domini M CC LXXVIII." Gil de Zamora in Fita, "Biografías," p. 328, n. 3. Juan Gil de Zamora, De preconiis Hispanie, ed. Manuel de Castro y Castro (Madrid 1955), pp. 143, 234; what is probably a scribal error--cf. p. clxiv--results in the loss of the final I in the date. This evaluation of Sancho should not be confused with what, in Sancho's eyes, became in effect a regency at the assembly in Valladolid in 1282 (Gaibrois, Sancho IV, vol. 2, p. 4). The possibility of joint rule, more or less formalized and probably with the king at first in a tutelary role, apparently escapes Ballesteros (Alfonso X,pp. 852-53, 874); but it was not necessarily strange to Alfonso (cf. PCG, chap. 969 concerning Alfonso VII and his sons).

132. Loaysa, Crónica, chap. 24. "Anales toledanos III," p. 173. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 786, 860-66.

133. Procter, "Materials for the Reign of Alfonso," p. 46. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 862.

134. MHE, vol. 2, no. 158. Loaysa, Crónica, chap. 27. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 877, 885-86, 889-95. The queen's whereabouts from the time of her arrival in Castile in 1279 are unknown until she attended the assembly in Valladolid in the spring of 1282. Doña Blanca had returned to France; the boys remained in Aragon as prisoners of Peter (Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 869-72, 895).

135. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 919-20.

136. Ibid., pp. 928-29. Daumet, Relations, p. 71. The fact that Alfonso de la Cerda as king of Jaén would remain Sancho's vassal would not, in Alfonsine eyes, violate the fundamental unity of the realm: "los vassallos otrossi, & los naturales, deuen guardar otrossi el ssennorio por que ssea ssienpre vno & lo aya el ssennor natural" (Espéculo, 2:6.1; cf. 2:16.1).

137. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 928-29. MHE, vol. 2, no. 228.

138. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 929.

139. MHE, vol. 2, nos. 171-87, 193. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 935-41.

140. Ballesteros, "Burgos y la rebelión," pp. 151-55; and his Alfonso X, pp. 948-50.

141. Those attending included Doña Violante (permanently estranged and separated from her husband from 1279 despite Loaysa's assertion that Alfonso pardoned her stay in Aragon [Crónica, chap. 27]), Alfonso's brother Manuel (up to this time one of the king's most trusted advisers as well as alférez mayor from 1258 to 1274 and mayordomo mayor from 1278 to 1282), and disaffected nobles like the Haros who had exiled themselves once more in accordance with their right. Loaysa, Crónica, chap. 28, attributes the summoning of Cortes to dissatisfaction over Alfonsine economic, especially taxation, policies. Cf. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, p. 975; and O'Callaghan, "Cortes and Royal Taxation," especially pp. 393-94, 397. For the so-called Cortes see Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 966-71, 975-77. The feeling of those who opposed the measures adopted by the majority is expressed in MHE, vol. 2, no. 198. After the assembly, whatever his own desire might have been, Sancho continued to style himself officially in documents from the chancery as "Infante don Sancho, fijo mayor e heredero."

142. Loaysa, Crónica, chaps. 30-31. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 976, 984.

143. Ballesteros, "Burgos y la rebelión," pp. 172-74; and his Alfonso X, p. 1017. Areas loyal to Alfonso are listed above in n. 50.

144. MHE, vol. 2, no. 228: "nos desheredamoslo . . . e dezimos . . . que sea maldicho de Dios et . . . lo damos nos por traidor." See also my forthcoming article in n. 104 above.

145. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 787-89, 811, 915, 988. MHE, vol. 2, no. 228.

146. MHE, vol. 2, no. 228. Alfonso mentions the kings of Portugal (his grandson), Aragon (his brother-in-law), England (his brother-in-law), and France (kin in many ways), and adds the pope. "E non fallamos otra cosa sino palabras buenas . . . que eramos desamparados de todos los omes del mundo de quien esperavamos conorte et ayuda" (pp. 118-19). Peter of Aragon was by turns friendly to Alfonso (Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 963-66), neutral (pp. 973-74), and finally, based in part on his growing animosity toward the Angevins, a partisan of Sancho (pp. 1026-34).

147. Ballesteros, "Burgos y la rebelión," pp. 185-86; and his Alfonso X, pp.1034-37.

148. MHE, vol. 2, no. 228. Ibn Abî Zare, Rawd al-Qirtâs, vol. 2, pp. 635-36, 735. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, pp. 982-83, 987-92, 1007-8, 1020-23. Daumet, Relations, pp. 80-81.

149. Ballesteros, "Burgos y la rebelión," pp. 186-88; and his Alfonso X, pp. 1037-40. For identification of the original loyalists see above, n. 50.

150. Loaysa, Crónica, chap. 32. "Chronica de Cardeña II," p. 379. Ballesteros, "Burgos y la rebelión," pp. 187-90; and his Alfonso X, pp. 1047-50, 1055-56.

151. Alfonso XI viene así a culminar una política iniciada con su bisabuelo Alfonso X, que se centra fundamentalmente en dos aspectos: establecimiento de jueces y control del derecho" (Iglesia Ferreirós, "Derecho municipal," p. 140). Marriage between descendants of Alfonso's two sons, Fernando and Sancho, further healed the breach caused by Fernando's premature death and the succession issue to which it gave rise.