Dawn of a Dynasty: The Life and Times of Infante Manuel of Castile 9781487530501

Citation preview

DAWN OF A DYNASTY The Life and Times of Infante Manuel of Castile

Dawn of a Dynasty The Life and Times of Infante Manuel of Castile

RICHARD P. KINKADE

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS Toronto Buffalo London

© University of Toronto Press 2020 Toronto Buffalo London utorontopress.com Printed in Canada ISBN 978-1-4875-0460-1   Printed on acid-free paper with vegetable-based inks.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Title: Dawn of a dynasty : the life and times of Infante Manuel of Castile / Richard P. Kinkade. Names: Kinkade, Richard P., author. Description: Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: Canadiana 20190115459 | ISBN 9781487504601 (hardcover) Subjects: LCSH: Juan Manuel, Infante of Castile, 1282–1347. | LCSH: Princes – Spain – Castile – Biography. | LCSH: Authors, Spanish – To 1500 – Biography. | LCSH: Castile (Spain) – History – To 1500. | LCGFT: Biographies. Classification: LCC DP134.8 .K56 2019 | DDC 946/.302092—dc23

University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial assistance to its publishing program of the Canada Council for the Arts and the Ontario Arts Council, an agency of the Government of Ontario.

Contents

Introduction  vii 1  The Early Years: 1234–52  3 2  The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59  30 3  The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60  74 4  Dominion in Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72  89 5  Revolt of the Nobles and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75  147 6  The House of Savoy: 1275  173 7  Problems of Succession: 1276–82  192 8  The Rebellion of 1282–84  241 Epilogue  277 Documentary Appendix  299 Abbreviations  351 Notes  353 Bibliography  459 Index  487 Colour illustrations follow page 88

Introduction

In 2006, as I began to work on the first new biography of Juan Manuel in nearly one hundred years, it was evident to me that no innovative study of the son could be attempted without previously establishing the historical and social context into which he was born. Specifically, the substantial territorial possessions and noble titles bequeathed to him by his father, Infante Manuel, progressively entangled him in a lifelong series of political struggles with his royal peers, which in turn inspired much of his unusual literary production during the following century. While the political implications seemed obvious, it was not clear how his literary production may have been profoundly influenced by the feudal relationships he inherited upon the death of his father in 1283. At that juncture, I assumed the limited material available on Infante Manuel’s life would only be sufficient to justify an introductory chapter presenting background information for the subsequent study of the life and times of his son; I was certainly not prepared to find anything of substance. In one of the few publications to address the issue until that time, an article published by Derek Lomax in 1982, the distinguished British historian of medieval Spain remarked that Infante Manuel was “a rather gray figure ... who lived in the king’s shadow and apparently never did anything of importance as an individual ... Nonetheless, the life and personality of Don Manuel are less known than they deserve to be, and although various historians mention him in passing, we have no in-depth study of him.”1 However, it quickly became apparent that Infante Manuel, the favourite of his older brother King Alfonso X, was not merely a passive figure in the complex evolution of Castilian politics during the thirteenth century, or a minor player in the broader panorama of European affairs that played out during the period, but a clever and astute politician who managed, through skilful diplomacy and subtle persistence, to amass a significant fortune based on

viii Introduction

a slow but relentless accumulation of territory and titles in the strategic Kingdom of Murcia, a buffer zone between the fiercely competitive ­kingdoms of Aragón and Castile. Infante Manuel’s good fortune, however, was not only the result of his characteristic diligence and discretion but rather of a peculiar set of circumstances surrounding the relationship between Alfonso X and his brothers Fadrique, Enrique, and Felipe. Whereas the latter three were openly hostile and rebellious towards their older brother in their undisguised ambition to secure power and domains in the Peninsula, Infante Manuel’s steadfast loyalty to Alfonso was rewarded over three decades with, ironically, precisely those objectives the others had sought and failed to achieve. Assured of his youngest brother’s fidelity and devotion, Alfonso endowed him with the tenancy of the very lands that his brothers had been denied and that, given their strategic location in the southeast between the kingdoms of Aragón, Valencia, Granada, and Castile, could only have been entrusted to one who enjoyed the utmost confidence of the Castilian monarch. In the Libro de las armas, Juan Manuel recalls that his father had been promised the Kingdom of Murcia by his brother following the conquest of the city under the combined leadership of Jaime I of Aragón and Alfonso X. Queen Violante, Alfonso’s wife, however, conspired against him, and he was instead given the city of Elche “within a region the Moors call the Alhofra, that was always considered to be a separate kingdom and domain that owed allegiance to no king; and he was given it thus that he and Don Alfonso, his son, or any legitimate male heir, might inherit that kingdom and that it should be an entailed estate; and that my father and Don Alfonso, his son, and all those who might possess that kingdom, should consider their lineage and their estate as if they were kings; and they have always done so to this day” (1.132). Though Juan Manuel attempts to create a mythical origin for his ­father’s acquisition of the fabled Alhofra, or the “Tierra de Don Manuel,” which he would later inherit, the historical facts are quite different.2 The geographical dimensions of the region referred to by Juan ­Manuel and known variously in his time as the Señorío or Kingdom of Villena or “Tierra de Juan Manuel” were immense, stretching from Cuenca in the north to the city of Murcia in the south and occupying a politically sensitive region between Castile and Aragón. The area was, in fact, a patchwork quilt of small domains held variously by the bishoprics of Cuenca and Cartagena, the Military Orders of Santiago, C ­ alatrava, the Hospital of St. John and Alcántara, all grouped around two political nuclei, the Tierra de Chinchilla and the Tierra de Alarcón. On the other hand, Infante Manuel’s domain, the “Tierra de Don Manuel,”

Introduction ix

was initially coterminous from 1257 onward with towns located along the Vinalopó River, extending from Villena to Elche and later including ­Almansa, Chinchilla, Jorquera, Hellín, and Isso within the bishopric of Cartagena, and the Valley of Ayora (Fig. 1). Following Infante Enrique’s rebellion in 1255 in which he plotted with Jaime I of Aragón to marry the king’s daughter Constanza and, with Jaime’s help, to carve out a realm for himself in the former ­Muslim kingdom of Niebla, Alfonso X retaliated by sending the rebel into exile and arranging to have Constanza marry Manuel instead. Given the ­political circumstances of the moment – the competition between Aragón and Castile to subdue and settle the respective ­ kingdoms of Valencia and Murcia, the constant threat posed by the kingdom of G ­ ranada, and the persistent risk of yet another invasion by the ­Marinids of North Africa – it must have occurred to Alfonso X that a buffer zone in the southeast between the three kingdoms was a practical and highly desirable design. Even as Enrique had dreamed of establishing a ­kingdom in the southwest between the Algarve and Seville, Infante Manuel would steadily accrue the towns and territories to the north and south of ­Murcia that would eventually be inherited by his son Juan Manuel and would constitute the middle kingdom of Villena. Relying on his youngest brother’s unswerving loyalty, the monarch first gave him Elda, a­ cquired from the Order of Santiago, which he then ceded to ­Manuel in 1257. By 1266, Infante Manuel was the lord of Elche, ­Crevillente, Aspe, Elda, Petrer, Sax, the Valle de Ayora, and Villena, all of which were then known as the “Tierra de Don Manuel.” However, the very nature of the domain, fashioned as it was from bits and pieces of former political and economic entities now owing allegiance to Infante Manuel and situated at a crucial intersection between the kingdoms of Aragón, Castile, and Granada, predestined it to an existence of conflict and dissension. Scarcely two years later, in 1264, the Mudéjar uprising in Murcia forced Alfonso and Manuel to seek the support of their father-in-law Jaime I, whose timely intervention revealed the precarious nature of the region and government u ­ nder Manuel’s tentative administration. It is at this particular juncture that Infante Manuel seems to have realized that if he hoped to preserve and expand his emergent kingdom, he would have to plan on greater personal involvement in the enterprise. By the time Manuel set out with Alfonso to meet Pope Gregory X in Beaucaire during the spring of 1275, he appeared to have consolidated his power and reputation in Villena and Murcia, but this same year would bring yet another invasion from North Africa and, most ominously, the tragic death of both his and his brother’s eldest sons and

x Introduction

heirs, Fernando de la Cerda and Alfonso Manuel. As a result of these unforeseen contingencies, Alfonso X would enter into the most difficult decade of his life and make decisions that would adversely affect both his kingdom and the Manueline dynasty for almost a century. Opting to designate his second son, Sancho, as the heir apparent and thus excluding his grandson, Alfonso de la Cerda, son of the late heir Fernando de la Cerda and Blanche, sister of Philip III of France, the Castilian monarch, known to history as the Wise King, created an untenable political situation that he ultimately attempted to resolve by providing his disinherited grandsons with a kingdom of their own in precisely that area of the Peninsula in which he had previously established a kingdom for Manuel. When Alfonso X signed a treaty in 1281 ceding the Valle de Ayora to Aragón in hopes of establishing a future realm for his dispossessed grandsons, Manuel understood that his best interests would no longer be served by his brother. Scarcely a year later, in the spring of 1282, Manuel would side with Sancho in the Assembly of Valladolid and call for Alfonso X to abdicate in favour of the heir apparent. Infante Sancho would later reward him for his support with even larger grants of land, including the lordship of Chinchilla, Ves, and Jorquera in the Mancha de Montaragón and Peñafiel. While many historians have branded Manuel a traitor for abandoning his brother during Sancho’s rebellion, the king’s threat to partition the kingdom, his chronic illness, and his increasingly irrational behaviour appeared to similarly alienate all but a very few of his formerly loyal family members and vassals. As the king’s closest relative and most trusted advisor, Manuel was perhaps in a better position to fully assess the situation and to realize that the monarch’s rule was quickly coming to an end. Sancho, he correctly reasoned, was conceivably the only person capable of rescuing the government at this crucial stage in the collapse of the monarchy. Infante Manuel would not live to realize his ambitious projects to repopulate and enlarge the political and commercial enterprise of his demesne. He died on Christmas Day, 1283, leaving his considerable estate to his wife and surviving legitimate children, Juan Manuel, his nineteen-month old son with Beatrice of Savoy, and Violante, a teenage daughter from his first marriage to Constanza of Aragón. Though his lands and titles had been confiscated by an irate Alfonso X, Infante Sancho would restore them, later investing this considerable patrimony in Manuel’s infant heir Juan Manuel, who would become one of the most important and influential political figures of the first half of the fourteenth century, and certainly one of the greatest prose writers of medieval Spain.

Introduction xi

Infante Manuel’s son would spend the rest of his life first restoring his father’s heritage and then enlarging it and protecting it against all odds. In fact, it has been argued that Juan Manuel’s writings essentially recreate an image of his father that he wanted and needed to believe in, though Infante Manuel’s legacy would be at once his son’s greatest source of pride and a relentless cause of anxiety and concern. Indeed, every aspect of the son’s life and works would faithfully mirror the persona of his progenitor, and therein lies the most compelling rationale for this biography. At the same time, it might be argued that, as the precursor of a royal dynasty that would endure for over three hundred years, Infante Manuel deserves in his own right to be better understood and more widely appreciated. As this project gained momentum over the years and an increasing number of documents came to light, it became clear that Infante M ­ anuel was not a minor figure during the reign of Alfonso X: he was a key player not only in the political affairs of the realm but on an international scale as his brother struggled against all odds to grasp the elusive crown of the Holy Roman Empire. In the process, Infante Manuel’s relationships with the aristocracy, the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and the knights and burghers who dominated politics in the towns and villages throughout the Peninsula have enhanced our understanding of complex issues that are normally observed through the biased lens of a unilateral interpretation provided by historians who analyse the history of Spain from the perspective of the reigning sovereign. Scrutinizing these kaleidoscopic aspects through the eyes of the monarch’s brother, then, has opened up new vistas that have led to differing interpretations of history. In the last thirty-seven years since Lomax’s essay on Infante Manuel appeared, hundreds of original manuscripts, documents, and publications have become accessible through the internet, especially royal chancery correspondence from the Archives of the Crown of Aragón, municipal and cathedral archives throughout the Peninsula and ­Europe, scanned documents and publications from the fifteenth to the twentieth century provided by Google, and countless articles and reviews now instantly available through various open-access networks on the web. At the same time, scholars studying the reign of Alfonso X continue to be deeply indebted to the pioneering efforts to provide original documents from that same era published over the years by ­Antonio ­Ballesteros, Juan Torres Fontes, Joseph O’Callaghan, and ­Manuel González Jiménez, without whose significant contributions much of the present volume could not have been realized. I am especially indebted to Prof. Emeritus Manuel González Jiménez of the University of Seville, who has read through the entire manuscript,

xii Introduction

providing invaluable comments, suggestions, and corrections to improve the text, though any remaining errors are, of course, entirely my own. I am grateful to the many students and colleagues who have made useful suggestions throughout this endeavour and would particularly like to recognize the support and backing of the Department of Spanish and Portuguese and department head Malcolm Compitello for providing release time during the past year to complete the project. Publication of the manuscript has been made possible by generous funding received from the Department and Alain-Philippe Durand, dean of the College of Humanities, through a college faculty research grant. ­Special thanks are due to Prof. Aurelio Pretel Marín for his knowledge and ­advice concerning the history and geography of the kingdom of Murcia and especially the “Tierra de Don Manuel”; to Peter Linehan for his careful reading and suggestions for improving chapter 3; to Regine Abegg for permission to publish the images in the cloister of the Burgos Cathedral; and, finally, to Paolo Blasi y Gianni Spera for their indispensable assistance in securing permission to publish the miniatures from the Biblioteca Nazionale di Firenze.

DAWN OF A DYNASTY The Life and Times of Infante Manuel of Castile

1 The Early Years: 1234–52

Much of what we know about Infante Manuel’s early years is contained in the Libro de las tres razones or Libro de las armas, written by his son, Juan Manuel, in response to three questions posed by the ­Dominican monk Fray Juan Alfonso,1 who had shown an interest in certain personal aspects of Juan Manuel’s life that the author obligingly addresses in his discourse: (1) the origin and meaning of the Manueline coat of arms; (2) the authority by which he was entitled to create knights, not having been knighted himself; and (3) the substance of a private conversation in Madrid with his first cousin, King Sancho IV, shortly before the death of that monarch in 1295 (Figs. 2, 3). The three razones or reasons proffered by Juan Manuel constitute a curious blend of personal observations, autobiography, and creative writing on the part of one who was perhaps the most noteworthy literary craftsman of fourteenth-century Spain. Given this, any consideration of the veracity or historical precision of the work must always be balanced with an appreciation of the author’s inclination to embellish these recollections of his noble ­ancestry and private relations.2 The Libro de las armas reports that Infante Manuel was born in ­Carrión, forty kilometres north of the city of Palencia, but does not provide a date of birth.3 The first official mention of his name is found in a bill of sale transferring property to the Premonstratensian monastery of San Pelayo de Cerrato located forty kilometres to the southeast of Palencia and given in Toviella in the year 1234.4 While the current location of Toviella/Tovilla/Tobilla is not clear, Villamediana is situated fifteen kilometres to the northeast of Palencia. The text of the deed states it was recorded during the reign of Fernando III, his wife Beatrice, and sons Alfonso, Fadrique, Fernando, Felipe, and Manuel with López Díaz de Haro, the king’s alférez or royal standard-bearer; García Fernández, his majordomo; Álvaro Rodríguez, merino mayor de Castilla or territorial

4

Dawn of a Dynasty

administrator of Castile; the archbishop of Toledo, Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada; and the bishop of Palencia, Tello de Meneses. The fact that ­Manuel’s older brothers Enrique and Sancho are not cited and that only the most senior members of the king’s court are mentioned leads us to believe that the scribe alluded only to those officials and members of the royal family who were actually with the monarch in or near ­Palencia at the time the transaction was recorded.5 According to the Chronica latina regum Castellae, one of the most accurate historical sources for the reign of Fernando III, when the king arrived in Carrión at the end of June 12326 he was met by the Queen Mother Berenguela and Queen Beatrice, who had already been there for some time, which we may interpret as being at least since 1231.7 The king and his court would remain in Carrión until the winter of 1233, when he set out to besiege Úbeda.8 Following the Feast of St.  ­Michael, 29 September 1234, the king and queen mother were in ­Burgos ­attempting to deal with the rebellious noble Lope Díaz de Haro, who had married his daughter Mencía to Alvar Pérez de Castro, lord of Paredes de Nava, without the sovereign’s permission.9 Fernando III was back in Carrión on 12 December10 and about to attack Alvar Pérez in Paredes, a village lying between Palencia and Carrión,11 when the queen mother and Beatrice intervened to prevent bloodshed sometime around 2 ­February 1235.12 Queen Beatrice, then, was clearly in Palencia and Carrión from at least 1231 to the spring of 1235, when the Chronica latina asserts she resided with the king and queen mother in Toledo.13 Thus there seems little reason to doubt Juan Manuel’s assertion that his father was indeed born in Carrión. Furthermore, based on the evidence of the Chronica latina, it is highly probable that Manuel’s older brother, Infante Felipe, was also born in Carrión sometime before 5 December 1231, when he is mentioned for the first time in a document subscribed by his father in León.14 Manuel’s ama, or wet nurse, was Doña Toda,15 who also nursed Juan Manuel’s ayo or guardian, Alfonso García,16 second son of García Fernández (d. 1242), Queen Mother Berenguela’s majordomo and the ayo or guardian of Alfonso X.17 Juan García, the eldest son of García ­Fernández and his wife, Mayor Arias, was raised together with the future King Alfonso X, who immediately appointed Juan García ­majordomo when he ascended the throne in 1252 and later named him almirante mayor, admiral of the kingdom. Doña Toda may well have been a member of the same García family and a relative of García Fernández, a possibility suggested by the fact that García Fernández had two daughters, Urraca and Marina García, the same names that appear in the Burgos document confirmed by Infante Manuel in 1281.18



The Early Years: 1234–52

5

Concerning his father’s birth, Juan Manuel relates in the Libro de las armas that Queen Beatrice had dreamed her unborn child and his lineage would avenge the death of Christ and that, coincidentally, King Fernando III had remarked that her vision was quite the opposite of a dream she had when she was expecting their first son, Alfonso.19 What had Beatrice dreamed about Alfonso that was in such stark contrast with the promising future she foresaw for Infante Manuel? No mention of it can be found during the Wise King’s reign. Indeed, the first clue we have to the origin of the vision is provided by Pedro Alfonso (d.1354), Conde de Barcelos, the illegitimate offspring of Alfonso’s grandson King Dinis of Portugal and author of the Crónica Geral de Espanha de 1344.20 In a substantial excursus inserted in a section of the history dealing with the reign of Fernando III, Don Pedro relates how the queen, as a young princess in her father’s court, learned from a Greek soothsayer that her firstborn son would be disinherited for blaspheming against God and that she herself would die in childbirth.21 The legend was apparently well known during the fourteenth century and is highly biased against Alfonso and his descendants.22 In fact, Ballesteros and others have repeatedly observed this same hostility in the context of the Crónica de Alfonso X,23 a history of the Wise King written about the same time as the Crónica Geral (c. 1344) during the reign of Alfonso XI, probably by Fernán Sánchez de Valladolid.24 Juan Manuel’s disputes with Alfonso’s successors Fernando IV and Alfonso XI are well documented and were cited by Pedro Alfonso, who was in exile at the Castilian court from 1317 to 1320, where he undoubtedly became well acquainted with his cousin Juan Manuel.25 There can be little doubt that Juan Manuel fully expected his readers to be familiar with the myth in some form or another. His own interpretation of the legend as a dream conveniently provided him with the opportunity to construct a similar but entirely opposite scenario concerning his father, one that would serve to dignify his progenitor in contrast to the negative prophecy concocted for his older brother, the king. As we shall have occasion to see later, the legend subsequently evolved over the years and by the end of the fourteenth century would cast Infante Manuel as the precursor of a new royal family, legitimizing the fratricide and usurpation of Pedro I’s bastard half-brother, Enrique II, while exalting the rise of an original dynasty that would commence with the birth of his great grandson, Juan I (1358; r. 1379–90) (Fig. 4). The tale as told by Juan Manuel in the Libro de las armas now proceeds to recount another aspect of the queen’s vision, that the royal couple would have a boy and that both had long since despaired of having any more children since none had been born to them for many years.26

6

Dawn of a Dynasty

This last remark, entirely at variance with the historical record, which reveals the queen had previously given birth to Infante Felipe in 1231 and again to Infante Sancho in 1233, reinforces the contention that Juan Manuel’s version of history is expediently located somewhere between fiction and fact. Juan Manuel also recalls that at the time of his father’s birth, “the Bishop of Segovia, Don Remondo, who was later the Archbishop of Seville,”27 was present, and since he was held in high esteem by the king and queen, it was decided that he should be the one to baptize and christen the baby. Considering the queen’s dream, the bishop thought it appropriate to call the baby “Manuel” because “it was one of the names of God and because Manuel means ‘God with us.’ And we are given to understand by this that if so much good were to come to ­Christianity from the birth of this infant, that it was in the power of the name of God and that God was with us.”28 However, Remondo de Losana (c. 1218–1286) was only bishop of Segovia from 1250 to 1259 and was subsequently archbishop of Seville from 1259 to 1286, and thus could scarcely have participated in the naming of Infante Manuel in 1234, sixteen years before he was invested with the mitre.29 Nevertheless, we must keep in mind that Juan Manuel was writing around 1342 about events that had taken place more than a century earlier. He was well aware that the archbishop was one of the most important ecclesiastical figures during the second half of the thirteenth century, Fernando III’s notary and a close friend and confident of Alfonso X.30 Most historians dismiss the queen’s dream as a fanciful fabrication despite the author’s insistent claims that “todo passo assi verdadera mente [1.121] ... cred por cierto que la iustiçia et la sentencia et la entencion et la verdat asi passo commo es aqui scripto [1.140].”31 A review of the historical circumstances surrounding Manuel’s birth and the choice of his name, however, can provide us, if not with any corroboration, certainly with a plausible explanation for such a phenomenon and how it may well have encompassed a mother’s fond hopes and aspirations for the last of her six sons. The clue to our understanding of the incident and Juan Manuel’s repeated assurances lies within two fundamental spheres: the popular ideology of the crusading movement during the first half of the thirteenth century and the queen’s ancestral connections to the royal houses of Komnenos and Hohenstaufen. As a member of the Komnenos family that ruled Constantinople from 1081 to 1185, the Byzantine emperor Manuel I (c. 1122, r. 1143–80) was the fourth son of John II Komnenos (1118–43) and the ­Hungarian ­princess Irene.32 In 1173, Manuel made cause with the Normans, the pope, and the Lombard cities against Frederick I Barbarossa of Germany



The Early Years: 1234–52

7

and placed his protégé Béla III on the throne of Hungary. ­Manuel’s tenyear-old son, Alexios II (1180–83), inherited the throne at his father’s death but was soon deposed and murdered by his cousin, Andronikos I Komnenos (1183–85). In 1185, Andronikus was slain by an angry mob in Constantinople and succeeded by his cousin, Isaac II Angelos (1156, r. 1185–1204), who had two children by his first ­marriage, Alexios IV and Irene. His daughter Irene by her first marriage to Roger III became queen of Sicily in 1193, and queen of Germany in 1197 by her second marriage to Philip of Swabia, with whom she had Beatrice of Swabia, mother of Infante Manuel.33 Upon the death of his first wife, Isaac II married Margaret, daughter of Béla III of Hungary (1173–96), with whom he had a son, Manuel Angelos. This Manuel was the half-brother of Irene, wife of Philip of Swabia, and thus the uncle of Beatrice of ­Swabia, which has led some historians to believe that Infante Manuel was named for him and not Manuel I Komnenos.34 In 1195, Isaac II was overthrown by his brother, who imprisoned and blinded him, assuming the throne as Alexios III. Three years later, when Pope Innocent III called for a new crusade, Isaac’s son Alexios IV, brother of Irene, the wife of Philip of Swabia, was able to persuade the crusaders, led by Boniface of Montferrat, a friend and ally of Philip of Swabia, to divert the Fourth Crusade from Egypt to Jerusalem by way of Constantinople, where the invaders restored Isaac II to the throne in 1203, crowning him co-emperor with Alexios IV. A year later, however, the resentful Greek populace assassinated Alexios IV, and the crusaders pillaged the city in the infamous “sack of Constantinople.” Isaac died a few days later. At this point, the crusaders assumed control of the city and its government, electing Baldwin I of Flanders and Hainaut (1172–1205) and inaugurating the new Latin Empire of Constantinople. Baldwin I immediately sent a message to the princes and prelates of Europe inviting them to participate in the conquest of the Levant, an enterprise in which all would find great fame and immense riches (“ad veras innumerasque divitias capessendas, temporales pariter et aeternas”).35 Throughout the thirteenth century, many of the younger sons of European royalty would answer his call to arms and the promise of conquering a kingdom for themselves. Among them were Infante Manuel’s older brothers Fadrique (1223–77) and Enrique (1230–1304). Manuel’s maternal ancestors, the Hohenstaufens, were the dukes of Swabia from 1079 to 1268 (Fig. 5). Frederick I Barbarossa (c. 1122, r. 1152– 90), son of Duke Frederick of Swabia, married Beatrice of B ­ urgundy in 1156 and had five children, among them Henry VI (1190–97) and Philip of Swabia (1178, r. 1198–1208). Henry’s wife, Constance, was the daughter of Roger II of Sicily, and this connection led to Henry’s

8

Dawn of a Dynasty

conquest of Sicily in 1194, the year their son, Frederick II, was born. Three years later, Philip of Swabia married Irene, daughter of Isaac II Angelos. Philip was murdered in 1208 by Otto of Wittelsbach, count palatine of Bavaria, to whom he had refused to give one of his daughters in marriage. Philip had four daughters: the eldest, Beatrice, was married in 1212 to Philip’s successor Otto of Brunswick (1175–1218) but died several weeks later; Marie was married to Henry II, duke of Brabant; Kunigunde was the consort of King Wenceslas of Bohemia; and Elisabeth, who changed her name to Beatrice following her older sister’s death in 1212, married Fernando III of Castile in 1219 (Fig. 6). Frederick II (1194, r. 1198–1250) was the first cousin of Beatrice of Swabia and the most powerful ruler in Europe during the first half of the thirteenth century. Following the debacle of the Fifth Crusade at Al-Mansurah and the loss of Damietta in 1221, the burden of a new crusade had fallen upon his shoulders. In 1229, Frederick achieved a tenyear truce with Sultan al-Malik al Kamil of Egypt with the concession of Jerusalem, Nazareth, Bethlehem, and the surrounding territories. His immediate departure from the Holy Land and his subsequent attempts to entrench his imperial authority throughout Italy, however, alienated Pope Gregory IX (1227–41), who now called for a new crusade in 1234, the year Manuel was born.36 Though the expedition would not get under way for another five years, it is entirely possible that Beatrice of Swabia envisioned for her newborn child a role in the future conquest of the Holy Land since, as the sixth son of Fernando III, the child had little hope of a future as a ruler in Spain. There are, nevertheless, other elements to be considered in this context. In 1224, Fernando III’s youngest sister, Berenguela, had married Jean de Brienne (1148–1237), the titular king of Jerusalem (1210–25) and later Latin emperor of Constantinople (1229–37). Jean was a minor French noble befriended by King Philippe II Augustus, who in 1210 arranged for him to marry Marie of Montferrat, queen of the crusader state of Jerusalem. Their daughter, Yolande de Brienne, inherited the crown of Jerusalem in 1212 at her mother’s death, though her father ruled as regent and was instrumental in persuading Innocent III to launch the Fifth Crusade in 1218 in support of his daughter’s k ­ ingdom. Yolande, Infante Manuel’s first cousin, was married in 1225 to ­Frederick II of Sicily, a union arranged by Pope Honorius III (1216–27) in the hope of securing Frederick’s support for a new crusade. Their son, Conrad IV (1228–54), Infante Manuel’s second cousin, was heir to the kingdom of ­Jerusalem through his mother and was also invested by his father as duke of S ­ wabia in 1235. The crusades, then, had spawned a broad spectrum of possibilities in the eastern Mediterranean for the younger princes of the royal



The Early Years: 1234–52

9

houses of Europe, and it is not inconceivable that Beatrice of ­Swabia had envisioned for her unborn son a bright future in an area that would later entice his older brothers the infantes Fadrique and Enrique. All of Infante Manuel’s brothers had been named for kings and emperors, and it is certain that he, too, was named for one of the greatest rulers of the crusader era, the Emperor Manuel I Komnenos, and not Beatrice’s obscure uncle, Manuel Angelos. In this context, many historians, including Argote de Molina, Ballesteros, and Lomax, were unaware of the fact that Jaime I, the Conqueror, and father-in-law of Alfonso X, believed his grandmother Eudoxia to have been the emperor’s daughter, as he tells us in his very personal autobiography, the Crònica o Llibre dels feits,37 adding that “l’emperador Manuel ... era en aquell temps lo mellor hom de crestians” (41). Eudoxia was actually Manuel I’s niece, the daughter of his older brother Isaac Komnenos, a fact that has only recently come to light.38 Because of this connection, well-known troubadours who frequented the courts of both Jaime I and Fernando III, such as Peire Vidal, Bertran de Born, Giraut de Borneil, and Folquet de Marseille, all sung the praises of Emperor Manuel.39 He is also mentioned in the Cantigas de Santa María of Alfonso X, where it is said he ordered a church to be built in Constantinople of marble blocks brought from distant places. When one of the blocks destined to face the altar of the Virgin was sawn in two, an image of Holy Mary holding the Christ child in her arms appeared inside.40 As Manuel’s biographer, Paul Magdalino, tells us: The twelfth century was the age of Roger II of Sicily, Henry P ­ lantagenet, Frederick Barbarossa and Saladin. It was also the age of Manuel ­Komnenos ... He conducted war and diplomacy on a grand scale and on all fronts. His court was a dazzling display of power and wealth, where state occasions were celebrated with fairy-tale magnificence. It attracted diplomats, exiles and fortune-seekers from many lands. Manuel also ­received more foreign potentates than any Byzantine emperor before or since: a king of France, a king of Germany, a Turkish sultan, a king of ­Jerusalem, and a duke of Saxony and Bavaria.41

The vision Queen Beatrice may have had of her unborn son, ­Manuel, as a crusader who would restore the glory of Constantinople and ­vanquish the infidels in the Holy Land coincides entirely with the ­mythical image of the late Emperor Manuel I then current in the I­ berian Peninsula and with the historical circumstances of Baldwin I’s call to arms in 1204 and the beginnings of the Sixth Crusade that Gregory IX promulgated on 27 November 1234, precisely at the time of Infante

10

Dawn of a Dynasty

­ anuel’s birth. In fact, the pope addressed the very same plea to Queen M Beatrice herself at about the same time.42 Manuel never had the chance to know his mother. Queen Beatrice died in Toro on 5 November 1235 when he was scarcely a year old.43 She had given Fernando III seven sons and three daughters44 and was revered by her first-born, Alfonso, who recalls three miracles associated with her in the Cantigas de Santa Maria.45 Following his father’s birth in Carrión in 1234, Juan Manuel relates in the Libro de las armas that the child was given to a nobleman who reared him outside the court, according to the royal practice of that age: And because it was not then the custom to raise the sons of kings so foolishly or so lavishly as we find today, realizing that such great expense should otherwise be utilized in the service of God and in support of our holy faith and of the kingdom, and that whatever could be saved this way should be used for these things instead, children were raised as simply as possible to protect the health of their bodies, so that as soon as they were able to be taken from the place where they were born, they were given to someone who would raise them in his home. And for this reason, Don Manuel was given to Pedro López de Ayala and he raised him in ­Pampliega and in Villalmuño, which is now deserted, and in Mahamud, and in the area of Can de Muño, where he had extensive holdings. And when the prince was older, and the king was well disposed to receive him at court, he went to court where he resided for a long time with the king, his father.46

Juan Manuel’s well-known antagonism towards Alfonso XI, the ruling monarch at the time he composed the Libro de las armas around 1242, is clearly in evidence here, where he draws a sharp and disapproving contrast between the rugged and frugal outdoor approach to child rearing favoured by Fernando III, who had his seven sons with Queen ­Beatrice raised by ayos in the countryside, and the luxurious, pampered upbringing of Fernando IV and Alfonso XI, the son and grandson of Sancho IV, both of whom had been nurtured in a courtly environment. The unflattering conclusion to be drawn is obvious: Alfonso XI, like his father, Fernando IV, was a capricious and extravagant monarch who reflected the arrogance, artificiality, and hypocrisy of the current ­Castilian court when compared to the unostentatious qualities of modesty, ­decency, and loyalty that had characterized the kings of Castile during the previous century. In fact, Alfonso X was raised by his ayo García Fernández in V ­ illaldemiro and Celada, both near Pampliega in the province of Burgos. Fadrique



The Early Years: 1234–52

11

was born in Palencia and brought up in the same region between Palencia and Burgos. Fernando, first mentioned in a document in Muñó (27  March 1225), and Enrique, also mentioned for the first time in a document from Muñó (10 March 1230), were most likely reared in the same geographical area to the southwest of Burgos as their two older brothers.47 Enrique’s ayo was Juan Marcos.48 Felipe, first cited in a document from León (5 December 1231) and Sancho, born in 1233 but first mentioned in 1243 by the archbishop of Toledo, Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada (1170–1247),49 were both, at the behest of their grandmother, Queen Mother Berenguela, assigned very early on to the tutelage of the same archbishop and chronicler who was instructed to educate them for the clergy.50 Infante Manuel also had two older sisters: Leonor, born about 1226, died in childhood; and Berenguela (1228–87), the subject of miracle 122 in the Cantigas de Santa Maria, entered the convent of Las Huelgas in Burgos in 1243.51 Infante Manuel’s ayo, Pedro López de Ayala, lord of Uribarri-Gamboa and the Houses of Mena and Unza, was one of Fernando III’s most trusted vassals.52 His grandson, Juan Sánchez de Ayala, was Manuel’s mayordomo at the latter’s death in 128353 and would become one of Juan Manuel’s closest retainers during his minority, first as adelantado mayor, or governor of the frontier of Murcia, and then mayordomo mayor until his death in 1306.54 Juan Sánchez de Ayala’s brother, P ­ edro López de Ayala (d. 1332), was Juan Manuel’s alférez mayor as early as 130355 and adelantado mayor at various times during the reigns of ­Fernando IV and Alfonso XI. The great grandson of Infante Manuel’s ayo, Fernán Pérez de Ayala (d. 1385), was the father of Pero López de Ayala (1332–1407), author of the Rimado de Palacio and the chronicler of the reigns of Pedro I, Enrique II, and Juan I, Juan Manuel’s grandson and namesake. Infante Manuel’s ayo Pedro López de Ayala was also a member of the Haro family, the most distinguished noble lineage of Vizcaya and intimately connected with the royal house of Castile. He was the first descendant of the Haros to use the cognomen “Ayala,” derived from the Valle de Ayala where he was born. His grandfather, Sancho López, was the brother of Diego López II de Haro, el Bueno, lord of Vizcaya, and Queen Urraca López, wife of Fernando II of León (1137; r. 1157–88), the uncle of Alfonso VIII (1155; r. 1158–1214), and grandfather of ­Fernando III, Infante Manuel’s father. Since Pedro López de Ayala’s g ­ randfather, Sancho López (d. 1170), was the brother-in-law of Fernando III’s grandfather, Fernando II (d. 1188), Pedro and Fernando III were of the same generation and probably about the same age. Pedro’s uncle, Lope Díaz de Haro, Cabeza Brava (c. 1192–1236), had married an illegitimate

12

Dawn of a Dynasty

daughter of Alfonso IX, Urraca, and their son, Diego López de Haro (d. 1254), was Fernando III’s nephew. Lope Díaz de Haro was also Fernando III’s alférez from the very first year of the latter’s reign in 1217 and continued in this office until his death in 1236.56 This same magnate’s rebellion against the monarch in 1233, recorded in the Chronica latina (chaps. 36–8), provides us with documentary evidence of the king and queen’s presence in Carrión de los Condes and the queen and queen mother’s timely intervention in the affair there shortly after Infante Manuel’s birth in 1334, as we mentioned earlier. Lope Díaz de Haro’s son, Diego López de Haro, el de Bañares (d. 1254), was Fernando’s alférez from 1237–41 but lost the post following his own rebellion against the king, though he was later reconciled with the monarchy and, following his successful intervention in the conquest of Seville in 1248, amply rewarded for his services in the partition of the city.57 Salazar y Castro, Casa de Haro, relates that Pedro López de Ayala was a “Caballero de la Mesnada de San Fernando” (256), or member of Fernando III’s palace guard, and that he participated in the conquest of Baeza in 1227 (257). Pedro’s uncle, Lope Díaz de Haro, was in charge of the campaign, and several years later, on 24 December 1232, ­Fernando III authored a document giving Pedro López, his wife, Inés, and their children certain property in Baeza in perpetuity.58 Though Salazar y Castro says Pedro López de Ayala was married to María Sanz de Unza, not Inés, this may have been a subsequent marriage of which the genealogist was unaware.59 This particular land grant in Baeza marks the beginning of the Ayala heritage in al-Andalus and the close connection between his descendants and those of Infante Manuel in the same region. Pedro and Inés were also awarded property in Tudela to which the king refers in documents dated 2 and 3 September 1237.60 Pedro López de Ayala may also have held the title of pertiguero mayor or sceptre bearer of the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela.61 If this is so, it provides us with an ante quem date of his death, since on 1 ­August 1253 we have a privilegio rodado or charter with the royal seal issued by Alfonso X and confirmed by a new “pertiguero de Santyague,” ­Andrés Fernández.62 Ayala later distinguished himself in the conquest of S ­ eville in 1248 and was rewarded in the partition of the city on 1 May 1253 with 100 aranzadas63 of olive groves and 10 yugadas,64 a donadío menor, or lesser grant of land, in Nublas in the district of Vicena, which Alfonso renamed Lopera, reflecting the cognomen “López.”65 Pedro López de Ayala’s younger brother, Sancho López, el Rato,66 is referred to in the Crónica particular de San Fernando as a prominent member of Fernando III’s retinue who participated in the conquest



The Early Years: 1234–52

13

of Magacela in February 1235 and of Córdoba in June 1236.67 Given his responsibility as the infante’s tutor, however, it is most likely that ­Pedro López did not participate in the Reconquista of Andalusia between 1234, the date of Manuel’s birth, and 1246, when his ward would have been twelve years of age and old enough to join his father’s court. Fernando III took Jaén in the early part of 1246, returning from there to Córdoba where he remained until December 1247 when he set forth for Seville to organize the siege of that city. This undertaking, the most challenging and arduous of all the later phases of the Reconquista, would require every resource at the king’s command, and to this end he sent out a general call for all available soldiers to aid him in the effort. Pedro López de Ayala would certainly have responded at this point, journeying to the besieged city with his own entourage of knights and accompanied by his young charge Infante Manuel. It is precisely at this moment in time that both Manuel and his ayo again emerge in the historical records. Before joining his father and older brothers in the siege of Seville, Infante Manuel probably spent the first fourteen years of his life in the señorío or domain of Pedro López de Ayala, which Juan Manuel tells us included Pampliega, Villalmuño, Mahamud, and Campo de Muñó, all of which are located in an area about twenty kilometres southwest of Burgos. The largest of these municipalities, Pampliega, lies on the banks of the Arlanzón River and is noted even today for an abundance of birds of prey such as eagles, falcons, and hawks, all of which figure prominently in Juan Manuel’s Libro de la caza, a book on hunting dealing primarily with falconry, considered to be the most noble form of the sport.68 Juan Manuel tells us that “los fijos del rey don Ferrando, que fueron muy grandes caçadores, sennalada mente el rey don Alfonso et don Anrique et don Felipe et don Manuel” (1.560). In this same work, Juan Manuel refers specifically to “Pero Lopez, vn cauallero falconero que era del infante don Manuel” (1.558), and this individual, while not Manuel’s ayo, is undoubtedly the falconer who received a sizeable land grant in Collera during the partition of Seville.69 There can be little doubt that the young prince first developed his life-long love of falconry under the tutelage of his ayo, and it is noteworthy that one of the most important works on falconry in the following century was written by Pero López de Ayala’s great-great-grandson and namesake, the famous chancellor of Castile under Juan I and Enrique III and author of the Libro de la caça de las aves.70 Pampliega is only about three kilometres from Villaquirán de los ­Infantes and Villaldemiro, where Alfonso was raised a decade earlier, and not a great deal further from Palencia and Muñó, where Fadrique

14

Dawn of a Dynasty

and Enrique were brought up by their own ayos. While Alfonso and Fadrique, born in 1221 and 1223 respectively, were many years his senior, Enrique, born in 1230, and Felipe, born in 1231, were only a few years older than Manuel, and these three, noted for their venatic prowess, would most likely have seen each other frequently during their childhood. Sancho, born in 1233 and later archbishop of Toledo, does not seem to have shared these proclivities, preferring intellectual pursuits. The next mention we have of Infante Manuel occurs in August 1245, in a document recording the purchase by the abbot of Santo Domingo de Silos of land owned by Teresa Garciaz in Ruviales, Arauzo de Miel, and Bañuelos de Suso.71 From August 1245, Infante Manuel is absent from any documents we are aware of until March 1248, when he confirms a legal decision given by his brother Infante Alfonso during the siege of Seville in the matter of a disagreement between Pedro Núñez de Guzmán, his wife Urraca García, and the monastery of San Pedro de Gumiel. Both sides had sent procurators to the court of Fernando III in Seville with Fernando Ibáñez, Alfonso García, and Pedro Sibiella or Ribiella as representatives of Pedro Núñez. The king decided to place the matter in the hands of Infante Alfonso, who sought the advice and counsel of the master of Calatrava, the master of Alcántara, the prior of the Hospitallers, and Pedro Ruiz de Olmos. The fifteen signatories to the document provide us with an invaluable record of those individuals who were closest to Infante Manuel at an early stage in his life, when he was only fourteen.72 The fact that Infante Manuel is the first witness to confirm the document both speaks to his high standing among the signatories and, ­absent the endorsement of any of his siblings, suggests that, as a lad too young to be involved in combat like his older brothers, he had become part of the compaña or retinue of Infante Alfonso, who had taken him under his wing as soon as he arrived in Seville, probably at this same time during March 1248, effectively replacing the boy’s guardian, Pedro López de Ayala. Infante Alfonso’s affection for his youngest brother, then, had been manifested at a very early stage of his life and continued to grow unabated until Manuel deserted him in 1282 (Fig. 7).73 The other signatories, in the order in which they confirmed, include Gutierre Ruiz de Olea, bishop of Córdoba (1246–49), whose rank and reputation at the court of Fernando III were so exalted that following the conquest of Seville in November of that same year, he was chosen to bless and Christianize the twelfth-century Almohad mosque that then became the Cathedral of St. Mary.74 He is followed by Sancho, bishop of Coria (1232–52), and Paio Gómez, master of the Templars in Castile



The Early Years: 1234–52

15

and León, who occupied the post after Pedro Gómez from around 1248 until 1253 and was succeeded by Martín Núñez.75 Fray Fernando Ordóñez, master of the Order of Calatrava (1243– 54), Pedro Ibáñez, master of the Order of Alcántara (1234–1254), and ­Fernando Rodríguez, prior of the Hospitallers, all figure prominently in the Crónica particular de San Fernando, which chronicles their ­heroic exploits during the siege of Seville at the time Infante Manuel was with them.76 Gonzalo González Girón is the brother of Fernando III’s m ­ ayordomo, Rodrigo González Girón, who later became Infante ­Enrique’s mayordomo and is mentioned by Alfonso X in one of his ­cantigas de escarnio.77 Pero Ponz or Pedro Ponce de Cabrera (c. 1198–c. 1254) was a Leonese nobleman, son of Ponce Vela de Cabrera and his wife Teresa Rodríguez Girón, who fought in the conquest of Andalusia with Fernando III. He was married to Fernando III’s half-sister, Aldonza Alfonso, illegitimate daughter of Alfonso IX, and their children were members of the Ponce de León family among whom the most notable was Fernán Pérez Ponce de León, lord of Puebla de Asturias, Cangas, and Tineo, mayordomo of Alfonso X, adelantado mayor de la frontera de Andalucía, and future ayo of Fernando IV. Pedro Ponce was with Infante Alfonso as early as 1245, when he confirms a charter given by the young prince in Jaén on 8 ­August of that year. He confirms, perhaps for the last time, a decree given by Alfonso X on 12 June 1253 in Seville.78 Pedro Aznárez was probably the son of an Aragonese nobleman, ­Aznar Pardo, the mayordomo mayor of Pedro II of Aragón who fought in the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa.79 Espinalt records that Pedro Aznárez, “un caballero de lo más ilustre de Aragón y Valencia,” joined the ranks of Fernando III’s army during the siege of Jaén in 1245 and was given a nearby alquería or village that he renamed Villar de don Pedro or ­Villardompedro.80 Pedro Aznárez is referred to by Ortiz de Zúñiga as one of the two hundred most distinguished knights ­honoured by ­Fernando III, and later Alfonso X, in the partition of Seville.81 It is highly unlikely he was the Pedro Aznárez, cantor of Valladolid and escribano of Queen Violante, who later received land in the partition of Murcia.82 Nuño Núñez, “fijo del ffreyre,” is documented in the Repartimiento de Sevilla with a similar entry, “Nuño Núñez, hijo del Freile.”83 He was the son of Nuño Pérez de Guzmán and the cousin of Pedro Núñez de Guzmán, who confirms this same document immediately after.84 Pedro was the brother of Mayor Guillén de Guzmán, Infante Alfonso’s concubine and mother of the future Queen Beatrice of Portugal. Nuño and Pedro fought with Infante Alfonso in the conquest of Murcia and in 1243 were awarded the tenancy of nine castles, including Jorquera and

16

Dawn of a Dynasty

Chinchilla.85 Pedro went on to serve Fernando III in the siege of Seville and was the protagonist of an episode chronicled in the Crónica particular de San Fernando recounting an attempt by the Moors of that city to assassinate Infante Alfonso.86 In 1258, Pedro became the first adelantado mayor of Castile. Ferrand Royz de Maça was a descendant of a noble Aragonese ­family that originated in Huesca and whose founder, Fortuño Maça, was ­distinguished with that surname following the Battle of Alcoraz (1096), in which he fought for Pedro I with three hundred foot soldiers from ­Gascony armed with maças or maces. His immediate ancestor was probably Pedro Maza III, lord of San Garrén (d. 1244), who participated in the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa (1212), or his brother Blasco Maza II, lord of Borja (d. 1238).87 Both brothers figure prominently at the court of Jaime I and are frequently mentioned in the monarch’s personal chronicle.88 Don Ladrón may well have been related to Fernando Ladrón, ­merino mayor de Castilla (1221–24).89 However, the merino had most likely died before 1248, and there is also a contemporary Aragonese nobleman named Don Ladrón” who was a member of the court of Jaime I and who is often cited in the Llibre dels feits, where the king refers to him as “fill que fo de don Ladró qui era noble de gran llinayatge” (33.73) and “rich om d’Aragó” (61.104). Miret i Sans affirms that he was Pere Ladrón II, the son of Pere Ladrón I, and that he was the lord of the castles of Aras and Foz Calanda and the father of Pere Ladrón III, who was married to Sancha Guillén, daughter of Guillén de Alcalá, and is referred to in other documents as Pere Ladrón de Vidaure, a surname that would connect him with Teresa Gil de Vidaure, consort of Jaime I.90 Teresa’s son, Jaime I de Xérica, was the grandfather of Juan ­Manuel’s close friend for whom he composed the second part of the Conde ­Lucanor.91 In 1253, Pedro Ladrón was given a land grant in the partition of Seville, indicating he must have participated in the Reconquista.92 At the same time, the text of the partition of Murcia sets forth in great detail the case of a certain Ladrón, a vassal of Infante Manuel, who had been found in violation of the provision to physically occupy the ­hereditary property he had received and, facing confiscation of the land, subsequently appealed to Alfonso X in March 1272.93 There can be no doubt that all of these members of the Ladrón family are related. The difficulty lies in their separate identification since, as in the case of this document and most others, the individuals are represented in the text with a single name “Don Ladrón.” “Pero Royz de Olmos” is most certainly an error of transcription for “Pedro Ruiz de Olea,” the brother of Gutierre Ruiz, bishop of Córdoba



The Early Years: 1234–52

17

and first adelantado mayor de la Frontera who was, with Alvar Pérez de Castro, awarded several mills in Córdoba on 1 February 1237 in the partition of the city.94 Pedro Ruiz Sarmiento fought in the siege of Seville in 1248 and was subsequently awarded land grants in the partition of the city.95 He was married to María García de Villamayor, had a son, García F ­ ernández Sarmiento, and was related by marriage to García Fernández de ­Villamayor, Infante Alfonso’s ayo, and Alfonso García de Villamayor, Infante Manuel’s hermano de leche.96 Furthermore, his signature, “­Pedro Roiz, filio de Roy Sarmiento,” as a witness to an early land sale in ­Palencia confirmed by Fernando III in July 1224, would seem to indicate he was from that area, precisely the geographical region in which Infante ­Manuel was born and raised.97 On 22 December, a month after the Moorish inhabitants of Seville had capitulated to the Christian forces of Fernando III, the king and his entourage made a triumphant entrance into the city and celebrated their victory in the former Almohad mosque, now baptized as the Church of St. Mary in a mass celebrated by Bishop Gutierre of ­Córdoba. The majestic procession described in the Crónica particular de San Fernando, including the royal family, the aristocracy, ecclesiastical dignitaries, knights of the military orders, and the princes of Portugal and Aragón among others, must have been a heady experience for the fourteen-year-old Infante Manuel, surrounded by the major protagonists in the greatest victory of the Reconquista since the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa thirty-six years earlier.98 Less than a week later, in a donation given in Seville on 28 December 1248, Infante Alfonso ceded the Church of San Juan in Murcia to Fernán Ruiz, prior of the Hospitallers or the Order of the Knights of St. John, a highly regarded combatant in the siege whose exploits were later recorded in the Crónica particular de San Fernando.99 The first to subscribe the document is “El ynfante don Manuel.”100 The text does not contain any mention of Manuel’s ayo, Pero López de Ayala, but those who do confirm provide us with some idea of the people with whom Manuel was closely associated at this time in his life. The very fact that he subscribes one of his brother’s charters but none at all of his father’s, Fernando III, indicates that he had already come ­under his brother’s protection and was probably considered to be at this moment more a part of Alfonso’s compaña than of his father’s court. The other signatories of the charter, in the order in which they confirm and with whom he must have been intimately linked, were the ­nephews of Fernando III and Infante Alfonso’s future alférez, Diego López III de Haro and his brother, Alfonso López de Haro.101 Alfonso

18

Dawn of a Dynasty

Téllez de Meneses, governor of Córdoba, accompanied Infante Alfonso in the conquest of Murcia, and his bravery in the siege of Seville is noted in the Crónica particular de San Fernando.102 His daughter, Mayor Alfonso, was married to Infante Alfonso de Molina, and their daughter, María de Molina, would later become the wife of Infante Manuel’s nephew, Sancho IV. His brother, Juan Alfonso, held the tenancies of Crevillente and Callosa, of which Crevillente would, in time, become the property of Infante Manuel.103 Gonzalo González Girón was the brother of Fernando III’s mayordomo, Rodrigo González Girón.104 Juan García de Villamayor was the son of Alfonso’s ayo, García Fernández de Villamayor, and Alfonso’s future mayordomo, who participated in the conquest of Murcia, where he was given the tenancy of Alhama.105 Fernán Ruiz de Manzanedo was the brother of Gómez Ruiz Manzanedo, protagonist in the Battle of Tablada during the siege of Seville and later father-in-law of Infante Manuel’s half-brother, Infante Luis.106 He was a member of Infante Alfonso’s mesnada and in Murcia on 15 April 1244 confirmed a grant in which Alfonso ceded the castle of Elda to Guillén el Alemán.107 Sometime before 1257, Alfonso X gave Elda to Infante Manuel. Rodrigo Gómez de Galicia, count of Trastámara, was a leading ­Leonese nobleman and son-in-law of Alfonso Téllez de Meneses.108 He fought with Diego López II de Haro in the siege of Seville and figures prominently in the Estoria de España (chaps. 1103, 1104, 1110).109 He is also mentioned by Juan Manuel in the Libro de la caza, where it is claimed he was the first to hunt herons with falcons, and it may well be that Infante Manuel’s life-long love of falconery was initially inspired by this very same individual.110 The Leonese nobleman Ramiro Froilaz was a descendant of Ramiro Froilaz, nephew of El Cid, and was the brother of Rodrigo Flores, as he is known in the Crónica particular de San Fernando, where he is usually mentioned in the company of Alfonso Tellez.111 Pedro Pérez de ­Villanueva del Campo was later King Alfonso’s portero and was closely connected to Juan García de Villamayor, with whom he is mentioned in the Repartimiento de Sevilla.112 He may also be the Pedro Pérez, knight commander of Segura, mentioned in a charter given by Fernando III to the Order of Santiago on 28 February 1246.113 Martín Gil and Martín ­Alfonso were the illegitimate half-brothers of Fernando III and the ­uncles of Infante Manuel. Martín Alfonso was the son of Alfonso IX and Teresa Gil de Soverosa, and Martín Gil was the son of Teresa Gil by ­another father. Both were active participants in the siege of Seville and received land grants in the subsequent partition of the city.114 Alvar Díaz de Asturias, son of Ordoño Alvarez de Asturias, was a participant in the



The Early Years: 1234–52

19

conquest of both Murcia and Seville and was rewarded in the p ­ artition of Seville.115 Pelay Pérez de Asturias was a member of ­Alfonso’s mesnada or royal guard, and because he confirms ­immediately after Alvar Díaz de Asturias, we may surmise they were related.116 In 1248, then, one month after the conquest of Seville, Manuel, as his brother’s protégé, found himself surrounded by older, highly experienced warriors who had distinguished themselves in major battles for over a decade during the reconquest of Andalusia, from Córdoba (1236) to Murcia (1243) to Jaén (1246) and finally to Seville (1248). Scarcely fourteen years of age, Manuel lived among these legendary figures whose deeds would one day be recorded in the pages of the Crónica particular de San Fernando as if they were episodes in a novel of chivalry. In fact, Juan Manuel remarks in the Libro de las armas that it was about this time, in the midst of the chivalric fervour that now gripped medieval Spain, that Fernando III duly conferred with his confessor, the Dominican friar Don Remondo, to design a coat of arms (Fig. 8) for the young prince: And when the king understood that it was time to give him a coat of arms, he is said to have remarked that since Don Remondo, who was then archbishop of Seville, had been so successful in naming him, that he wished for him to decide which arms he should be given. And after the king had informed the archbishop, he gave him a specific date by which he was to consider the matter and they say this was done so that he might have time to ask God to enlighten him concerning that task with which the king had entrusted him. And when the time came, he devised this shield which we now have: quarterly argent and gules just as they are used by kings. And in the first quarter gules, where one finds a castle or, he placed a man’s hand with a golden wing holding an unsheathed sword. And in the quarter argent, where one finds a lion, he placed that same lion. And in this manner, our coat of arms are quarterly wings and lions just like the quarterly castles and lions of the kings of Castile. And they say that the archbishop remarked that he so devised this coat of arms for the following reasons. In the first quarter gules is found the wing and the hand and the sword so that the first thing found in the quarter is the sword. And this sword signifies three things: the first, strength, because it is of iron; the second, justice, because the blade cuts both ways; the third, a cross. Strength is necessary so that one’s dreams may be fulfilled in order to conquer and vanquish those who do not believe in the true faith of Jesus Christ. Justice is necessary because if a man is not just and righteous he cannot have the grace of God with which to bring about such a great deed.

20

Dawn of a Dynasty

Likewise, the cross is the most necessary thing of all for he who wishes to realize such a deed must always keep in his heart the memory of our Lord Jesus Christ who to redeem us sinners never shrank from dying on the cross.117

Archbishop Remondo was undoubtedly one of the most prominent figures in Castile during the reign of Alfonso X, and his influence on Infante Manuel is demonstrable. Certainly, the enduring relationship his son Juan Manuel had with the Dominican order may ultimately be linked with the reputation and authority of Don Remondo who, as the godfather of Manuel’s nephew, Infante Sancho, was no doubt responsible for the young man’s proclamation on 4 May 1272 taking under his protection all the members of the Dominican order in Castile and Leon.118 Thirteen years later, in 1285, Don Remondo would baptize the new king’s son, the future Fernando IV.119 For the next three years we can find no documents mentioning Infante Manuel until 31 July 1251, when he confirms a donation made in Seville to the Order of Alcántara by his brother, Infante Alfonso.120 Subscribing to the document are Infante Fadrique; Manuel’s uncles, ­Alfonso de Molina and Rodrigo Alfonso, illegitimate son of Alfonso IX of León; Rodrigo González Girón, Fernando III’s mayordomo; Juan García, “mayordomo de don Alfonso;”121 Alvar Gil, son of Gil ­Manrique and brother of Gonzalo Gil, the adelantado of León;122 the brothers ­Pedro and Nuño Guzmán, who had fought at Alfonso’s side in the siege of Seville; and Alfonso García, brother of Juan García de Villamayor and future ayo of Juan Manuel. The co-signers of this document indicate that the group surrounding the future monarch had been undergoing change. The only signatories to confirm who were also present in the two previous documents from 1248 are Juan García de Villamayor and Pedro ­Guzmán, while the absence of the Haros surely indicates their growing mistrust of Alfonso and their alliance with the dissident ­Infante Enrique. Ten months later, on 30 May 1252, the Crónica particular de San ­Fernando recounts that Manuel, together with all his brothers and sisters – with the exception of Sancho, archbishop-elect of Toledo, and Berenguela, a nun in the convent of Las Huelgas, Burgos – was at his father’s deathbed in Seville.123 The account we find here of Fernando III’s final hours is quite detailed and states that the dying monarch required Infante Alfonso to pledge himself to the care and support of his siblings and the queen, but mentions no other particulars concerning Manuel. As if to compensate for this neglect, Juan Manuel asserts in the L ­ ibro de las armas that in his final hours the sovereign, perhaps to make amends



The Early Years: 1234–52

21

for having given his father nothing during his lifetime, now bestowed upon him the legendary espada Lobera, his fabled sword. The moment is recalled at second hand by Sancho IV, who relates the matter as though he had been an eyewitness: When King Fernando lay dying in Seville, he was surrounded by his wife, Queen Juana, Infante Don Alfonso, his son, my father, who was later king, and Infante Don Alfonso de Molina, his brother, and all or most of his children; and he left all of them well endowed, except your father, who was very young. And Don Pero López de Ayala, who raised him, brought the young man before the king and begged him to remember him. And when he appeared before him, the king was near death; and being able to speak only with great effort, he told him: “son, you are the last child I had with Queen Beatrice, who was very saintly and a very good woman, and I know that she loved you very much; I, too, love you but am unable to give you any inheritance, and so I give you my sword, Lobera, which is of great value, and with which God favored me greatly, and I give you these arms with their emblems of wings and lions.” And at this point King Don Sancho explained to me how these arms were devised and what they signified: And then King Don Fernando told your father that he was giving him these arms and this sword and that he asked that God might bestow upon him these three gifts: first, that wherever these arms and this sword might be that they might always be victorious and never vanquished; ­second, that God might always increase in honour and estate those of this lineage who carried these arms, and might never diminish them; third, that this lineage might always be blessed with a legitimate heir; and on top of this, he gave him his blessing, saying that he prayed God might give and bestow upon him this blessing that he gave him, because he gave him all the blessings he could give; and that he felt that with these things he had given him that he had received a better inheritance than any of his children.124

In spite of the fact that today we have two Lobera swords belonging to Fernando III, one in the king’s tomb in the Royal Chapel of the ­Cathedral of Seville and the other in the armory of the Royal Palace in Madrid, Juan Manuel’s story is corroborated by the contemporary Crónica de Alfonso XI (1344) and the Gran Crónica de Alfonso XI (1376– 79), both of which report that the espada Lobera was in his possession during the Battle of Guadalhoce in 1326 and the Battle of El Salado in 1340.125 Nevertheless, and though the sword was actually given to him by his father and later handed down to his own son, Infante Manuel does not seem to have obtained anything else from Fernando III, and

22

Dawn of a Dynasty

the explanation is quite simple: the king was entirely absorbed during the last two decades of his reign in the Reconquista of al-Andalus. The final great battle of these military campaigns was waged during the siege of Seville in 1248 when Manuel was scarcely fourteen years old, and the king was in increasingly ill health until his demise four years later. In spite of the fact that his older brother, Infante Enrique, had distinguished himself in this same conflict at the age of eighteen, Manuel was, indeed, too young to actively participate in any of the military campaigns so dear to his father. This, of course, would have entitled him to an inheritance in the subsequent partition of Seville and the chance to prove his worth in the eyes of the monarch. Though Infante Manuel was a relatively obscure figure for the first eighteen years of his life during the reign of Fernando III, who never considered him important enough to confirm a single royal document, he quickly achieved prominence at court when his brother, Alfonso, ascended the throne in June 1252 (Fig. 9). From that moment on, until his defection thirty years later, Manuel was the monarch’s closest confidant and companion, as evidenced by his confirmation of nearly every royal chancery document from August 1252 to April 1282. That his desertion of Alfonso in 1282 was perhaps the king’s greatest source of grief is fully reflected in the sovereign’s own words in his last will and testament: “Don Manuel, nuestro hermano, vimos que tan rraygado era el su amor en nuestro Corazon, como del fijo que mas amamos.”126 Manuel’s collaboration in the rebellion of his nephew Sancho was an especially cruel blow for Alfonso X, who for much of his life had had to contend with the disloyalty of family and friends. In fact, Manuel’s long and loyal support of the monarch was precisely what distinguished him from most of his older siblings and was the fundamental reason for his rapid advancement at court. To better understand the favoured position he occupied, we must review Alfonso’s relationships with his other five brothers. The eldest, Fadrique (1223–77), was named either for his maternal great grandfather, Frederick Barbarossa, or his mother’s cousin, the ­Emperor Frederick II (Fig. 10a). Apparently, this onomastic connection with the Duchy of Swabia was not coincidental. As the ­daughter of Philip of Swabia, Queen Beatrice could reasonably lay claim to his domain, and this in turn became a realistic expectation for her s­ econd son, who would not inherit the throne of Castile. Consequently, on 4  ­ December 1239, Fernando III despatched two missives to Pope ­Gregory IX informing him that his wife’s last request had been to invest her legacy in her son and that he would be sending his emissary, Guillermo, the Benedictine abbot of Sahagún, with instructions urging



The Early Years: 1234–52

23

his support for Fadrique’s rights to the title.127 The following day, Queen Mother Berenguela addressed a similar letter to the pontiff.128 Ultimately, both pope and emperor appeared to be amenable to the proposal, and Frederick II wrote to Fernando indicating he would be pleased to receive his young cousin.129 Infante Fadrique was sixteen years old when he arrived at the emperor’s court in Foggia during April 1240.130 He would spend the next five years as a royal retainer, accompanying Frederick on his many sojourns throughout Italy and confirming a number of royal documents that attest to a strenuous itinerary.131 During all this time, however, the emperor avoided making any decision concerning the disposition of the Duchy of Swabia, and eventually Fadrique became disillusioned. Finally, following Frederick’s excommunication by Pope Innocent IV in June 1245, Fadrique abandoned his cousin’s court, fleeing to Milan.132 From there he managed to return to Castile sometime during that same year and was subsequently engaged in the siege of Seville, where the Crónica particular de San Fernando tells us he and his brothers Alfonso and Enrique attacked the fortress of Triana.133 Scarcely a year later, however, Alfonso, taking advantage of F ­ adrique’s failure to secure his maternal inheritance, petitioned the pope to support his own claim to the Duchy of Swabia.134 This unwise decision taken by the ambitious young heir to the throne of Castile provoked an immediate negative reaction from Fadrique, who had invested five fruitless and frustrating years in the pursuit of his inheritance only to see his chances of obtaining the title unfairly usurped by his older brother. There can be no doubt that this juncture marked a turning point in the relationship between Alfonso and Fadrique, who could no longer trust his brother and who would, in time, lose no opportunity to betray him. For the time being, Fadrique’s resentment was allayed by a significant grant of land he received from Alfonso X in the 1253 partition of Seville, including some twelve thousand pies135 of olive orchards and numerous houses, mills, and vineyards in Sanlúcar, Gelves, Guisarat, Alpechín, Cambullón, Brenes, Rianzuela, and Algaba.136 Alfonso and his second brother, Fernando (1225–43) (Fig. 10b) were, if we believe contemporary sources, undoubtedly close companions. The historian Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada reports that in 1237, F ­ ernando III returned to Córdoba with his sons Alfonso and Fernando “qui tunc in flore adolescencie letabantur,” which the Estoria de España paraphrases as “que escomençauan estonçes a ser mançebos et auien ­sabor de salir et cometer grandes fechos commo su padre ... et corrieron tierra de ­moros a todas partes, et robaron et quebrantaron et fezieron quanto quisieron.”137 Six years later, Infante Fernando fought alongside Alfonso in

24

Dawn of a Dynasty

the conquest of Murcia and was richly rewarded by his older sibling in the partition of the city, in which he was assigned the tenancy of the castles of Murcia and Molina Seca according to a document dated 5 July 1243.138 Infante Fernando, however, must have died of unknown causes sometime soon after, since the last record concerning him from the royal chancery is found in a privilege issued 13 N ­ ovember 1243.139 After this date we hear no more of him. Nevertheless, Julio González states without citing his sources that Infante Fernando participated in the 1248 siege of Triana.140 Royal chancery documents mentioning “­ Fernando” from 6 March 1249 forward refer to the child born to ­Fernando III and his second wife, Jeanne de Ponthieu, whom he married in N ­ ovember 1237 following the death of Queen Beatrice in N ­ ovember 1235.141 ­Fernando de Pontis, as he was known, was born after 20 June 1239, when he is first mentioned in a privilege granted by his father to the town council of Segovia.142 The relationship between Alfonso and his third brother, Enrique (1230–1303), was strained apparently from childhood (Fig. 10c). Both were ambitious, determined, and highly competitive, and certainly ­Enrique is prominently portrayed in the contemporary Estoria de E ­ spaña as equally adept in battle during the Reconquista of Andalusia. In fact, save for Alfonso himself, Enrique is mentioned more often than any of his siblings for his bravery and tenacity in the Andalusian c­ ampaign, first in the aftermath of the battle for Jaén in September 1246 and again the following year during the struggle for Jerez, Benahofar, and Macarena on the way to the siege of Seville.143 He was subsequently rewarded for his efforts by Fernando III, who bestowed disproportionate concessions upon the young prince in Morón and Siste to be exchanged at a later date for Jerez, Arcos, Lebrija, and Medina Sidonia as soon as these towns could be taken from the Moors.144 Whatever previous tensions existed between the two brothers now came to a head in January 1249 when Fernando III commanded those who had participated in the siege of Seville, and were now the recipients of newly conquered lands in the reapportionment, to swear an oath of fealty to Alfonso as crown prince and successor. Alfonso wrote to his future father-in-law, Jaime I of Aragón, that Enrique refused to pay homage to him and, instead, kissed the hand of the king, disdaining his older brother.145 Later that same year, Enrique placed the lands given to him by his father under the control of the Order of Calatrava, evidently to safeguard them from confiscation by his older brother.146 In the subsequent partition of Seville in May 1253, however, while ­Enrique’s ­vassals and servants were amply rewarded for their service to the crown, he himself received from Alfonso X a significantly smaller



The Early Years: 1234–52

25

gift of land: two thousand pies of olive groves, fig trees worth six thousand baskets of figs and eight hundred aranzadas in Borgabenalcadí.147 To make matters worse, that same year Alfonso took the charters for Morón, Jerez, and Arcos that Enrique had received from their father and entrusted to the Order of Calatrava and tore them up, effectively appropriating the lands for himself.148 The rift that now existed between the two brothers would never be healed during their lifetimes. Infante Felipe (1231–74), Alfonso’s fourth brother (Fig. 11), had been placed at an early age in the household of Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada, archbishop of Toledo and primate of Spain, where, on the advice of Queen Mother Berenguela, he was to be raised for a career in the church.149 In 1240, he was sent to Burgos150 to be tutored there by the recently elected bishop, Juan de Soria, Fernando III’s chancellor.151 Three years later, Felipe was appointed abbot of Castrogeriz and elected ­abbot of Valladolid.152 During 1244–45, he travelled to Paris accompanied by Juan de Soria and Remondo Losana, the future bishop of Segovia who Juan Manuel claims was responsible for naming his father ­Infante ­Manuel.153 While in Paris he studied with Albertus ­Magnus, who ­mentions him in the De mineralibus (c. 1254).154 By 1250, his ­father had procured for him the title of archbishop-elect of Seville.155 Two years later Fernando III richly endowed the see of Seville, though curiously, and perhaps in view of Felipe’s apparent lack of enthusiasm for an ecclesiastical career that had been chosen for him and not by him, he makes no mention of the infante in this same document.156 Nevertheless, Alfonso and Felipe seemed to have enjoyed a convivial relationship as long as Felipe remained within the context of the church, and he was certainly well endowed by Alfonso X in the partition of Seville, in which he and his younger brother Sancho each received thirty thousand pies of o ­ live groves and three hundred aranzadas in Buyena.157 In 1258, however, ­Felipe abandoned his ecclesiastical pursuits to marry Princess Christina of Norway. When she died in 1262, he married Inés de Castro and later, at her death, Leonor Ruiz de Castro, sister of Fernán Ruiz de Castro, two marriages that ultimately shifted his loyalties and interests more in line with those of his in-laws. In 1269, Felipe and members of the Castro family made an important financial arrangement with the Order of Calatrava involving lands and rents that they hoped to receive as an inheritance from Queen Mencía, widow of Sancho II of Portugal. Alfonso, however, persuaded Mencía to leave her property to his son, Crown Prince Fernando de la Cerda, excluding Felipe, his wife, and the Castros.158 From this point on, Alfonso’s relationship with Felipe was tinged with animosity and resentment, and this hostility would endure until the infante’s death in 1274.

26

Dawn of a Dynasty

Alfonso’s fifth brother, Sancho (1233–61) (Fig. 11), destined like ­ elipe for an ecclesiastical career, followed closely in his brother’s footF steps during the first twenty years of his life. The same contemporary sources that inform us of Felipe’s activities refer also to Sancho’s residence with Archbishop Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada in Toledo until 1240, when he came under the tutelage of Juan de Soria, bishop of Burgos. He also studied in Paris during 1244–45 and was appointed archbishop-elect of Toledo by Innocent IV in 1250.159 Sancho, unlike Felipe, must have been perceived as a dedicated cleric judging by the lavish endowment Fernando III made to the see of Toledo in a document in which he specifically mentions Sancho numerous times.160 Sancho subsequently ­received significant bequests from Alfonso X in the partition of Seville, and in the following years the sovereign was particularly generous with gifts to the Cathedral of Toledo, all of which were meant to recognize the deep affection he felt for this sibling. Sancho enjoyed Alfonso’s fullest confidence. In 1255 he was entrusted with an embassy to Paris to arrange the marriage of Alfonso’s daughter Berenguela (b. 1253) to the crown prince of France, Louis (1243–59). In that same year, he journeyed to London as the king’s agent to arrange another royal marriage, this time between Infante Manuel and one of the daughters of Henry  III, ­either Princess Margaret (1240–75) or Princess Beatrice (1242–75), a matter we shall deal with later in detail.161 Sancho died unexpectedly in 1261, and with his passing Alfonso X lost one of his closest supporters and most trusted advisors. Infante Manuel also had three sisters, two of whom he never knew: Leonor (1226?–30?), Berenguela (1228–88), and María (1235). We may assume Leonor was the eldest because Lucas de Tuy, Chronicon mundi (1236), and Jiménez de Rada, Historia de rebus Hispanie (1240), record the children of Fernando III and Beatrice by birth order, placing Leonor before Berenguela, while Jiménez de Rada states “decessit paruula,” that she died as a young child (VIIII.xii.292). The same birth order is observed in Alfonso’s own chronicle, the Estoria de España, which records “dos fijas, ... donna Leonor que se murio ninna pequeña et ... donna Berenguela que metieron virgin en el Monasterio de las Huelgas” (chap. 1036, 720). María was born in 1235 and died in the same year a few days before the death of her mother, Beatrice, according to Lucas de Tuy, who reports the fact in the Chronicon mundi (1236).162 Berenguela (Fig. 12), born in 1228 and named for her aunt and grandmother, is prominently featured in Cantiga 122 where we are told she was brought back to life by a miracle of the Virgin Mary. The legend recounts that she was promised by her parents to the Virgin and the Order of Citeaux and taken by her mother to the Cistercian monastery of Las Huelgas in



The Early Years: 1234–52

27

Burgos, where she fell ill and died but was resuscitated soon after by the Virgin.163 Berenguela took the veil at Las Huelgas on 2 S ­ eptember 1243 from the hands of Don Juan, chancellor of Castile and bishop of Burgos,164 in the presence of her father and brother Alfonso.165 In 1254, King Alfonso X refers to her as “la inffante donna Berenguella, mi ­hermana, que es sennora e mayor del monesterio.”166 Numerous documents throughout the reign of Alfonso X attest to his great fondness and support for Berenguela, a brotherly affection that we might suppose was also shared by Infante Manuel.167 However, in 1283, during Sancho’s rebellion against his father, Berenguela was summarily exiled by Sancho, whose every move was at that time reviewed and approved by his uncle Manuel, as we are so often told in documents from that era. Berenguela remained faithful to Alfonso throughout his reign and undoubtedly was staunchly opposed to Sancho’s attempts to usurp his father’s power. We are informed of her exile in a letter dated 5 July 1283 from her brother-in-law, Pedro III of Aragón, who responds to a plea from the town council of Burgos petitioning him to intervene on behalf of the beloved “Señora de las Huelgas.”168 Pedro provides no details and declines to become involved in a dispute in which he insinuates Sancho may well have had ample reason to act as he did. On that same day, however, Pedro writes to Sancho asking him to forgive his aunt, though once again failing to state the nature of her offence.169 We cannot help but note that Manuel’s failure to speak up for his sister, motivated perhaps by his desire to ingratiate himself with his nephew Sancho at the expense of a sister who had never shown herself to be other than a devoted family member, is yet another unsettling aspect of the last years of Infante Manuel’s life, which ended five months later in December 1283. Berenguela was back in Burgos and in Sancho’s good graces by 27 March 1285, when the king ratified a privilege “por ruego de la ynfante donna Berenguella, nuestra tya,” together with thirty-one other concessions he made to the monastery at the behest of his aunt between 27 March and 5 May.170 Berenguela lived until at least 1288 and perhaps 1290.171 As we have seen from this brief synopsis of the lives of his ­brothers and sisters, Manuel’s rapid rise to prominence in Alfonso’s court was due primarily to several crucial aspects. He was the youngest of the seven sons of Fernando III and Beatrice – Alfonso, Fadrique, ­Fernando, Enrique, Felipe, Sancho, and Manuel – and the only one to have r­ eceived neither recognition nor inheritance during his father’s reign. He had been too young to distinguish himself in the conquest of ­Andalusia, thereby eliminating any chances he might have had to obtain significant land grants, ecclesiastical appointments, or other substantial

28

Dawn of a Dynasty

gifts from the monarch. In fact, his absence from any of the documents ­issuing from the royal chancery during the reign of Fernando III leaves us with the distinct impression that he was never more than a ­passive ­observer in his father’s entourage, never an active participant. He was not a ­warrior, nor does he seem to have possessed any particular skills or abilities that might have set him apart from all the other minions at court aside from the fact that he was a prince of the realm – though decidedly the least of them all, with the possible exception of his half-brothers and -sister, the sons and daughter of Fernando III and Jean de Ponthieu or Dammartin (c. 1220–79), though these children ­appear to have been well endowed by their mother.172 Of his four half-­ siblings, Fernando (1239–69), Leonor (c. 1242–90), Luis (c.  1243–72), Simón (c. 1245–50), and Juan, who died in infancy, only ­Leonor, who became the wife of Prince Edward of ­England in 1254, would exercise any influence in the life of Infante Manuel. Infante Alfonso’s attempts to secure the Duchy of Swabia for himself soon after Fadrique had returned disillusioned from the court of ­Frederick II in 1245 had effectively alienated this sibling, and Fadrique would remain a threat to the monarch for the rest of his life, which ended ignominiously when Alfonso X had him executed in 1277. E ­ nrique had manifested an early dislike of Alfonso, whom he viewed as an obstacle to his own territorial ambitions, and the two would never reconcile during their lifetimes. Infante Fernando, until his death soon ­after the siege of Murcia in 1243, had undoubtedly been Alfonso’s closest companion and constant comrade in arms until that point, and given the circumstances, Alfonso must have keenly felt his passing. ­Felipe and Sancho were comfortably ensconced within their respective ecclesiastical careers and accompanying revenues; while Felipe would never be reconciled to the calling his grandmother had intended for him, S ­ ancho was utterly dedicated to the priesthood, and yet neither of them could be considered unconditional supporters of the heir apparent. That role was to be reserved for Manuel, who was scarcely e­ ighteen at his ­father’s death. Without lands or titles, Manuel was a virtual orphan absolutely reliant upon the goodwill of his older brother and thus could be counted on absolutely, though it would be cynical to suppose that Infante Alfonso’s fondness for Manuel was inspired by any feelings other than the warmest fraternal affection. Their significant difference in age, some thirteen years, must also have predisposed the decidedly sentimental monarch to conceive of this vulnerable sibling as an alter ego, an impressionable and malleable young man whom he could effectively mould in his own image and who would, in time, become his closest friend and confidant.



The Early Years: 1234–52

29

In this context, Infante Alfonso seems to have made a conscious decision to take Manuel under his protection and to create a place for him in his own mesnada as early as March 1248, when he left Murcia at his ­father’s request to join the ongoing siege of Seville. We may also suppose that Manuel’s ayo, Pedro López de Ayala, had brought the young man with him from Palencia along with many members of the ­Castilian and Leonese nobility who had been summoned by Fernando III in 1247 to participate in the last and greatest struggle of the reconquest of ­Andalusia. Although there is a notable hiatus of three years between December 1248 and July 1251 when we have no documentary evidence concerning Infante Manuel’s activities or, indeed, his whereabouts, this lapse may be due more to an absence of extant documents despatched by Infante Alfonso during that time than to any deliberate neglect of his younger brother. After July 1252 and Alfonso X’s ascension to the throne, Infante Manuel is a consistent signatory of most of his older brother’s official documents, a trend that would continue until the spring of 1282. Manuel’s entire life at court seems to have been coloured by these salient features of his early childhood; they certainly help to explain his unqualified support of Alfonso until the final years of his brother’s reign. Just as Alfonso had previously alienated Fadrique and Enrique by confiscating their lands and titles, his subsequent attempts in 1282 to diminish Manuel’s extensive holdings in the kingdom of Murcia in order to provide an inheritance for his displaced grandsons, Alfonso and Fernando de la Cerda, would effectively estrange even this sibling, who would ultimately side with his rebellious nephew Sancho.

2 The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

Shortly after his ascension to the throne, Alfonso X appears to have embarked upon a conscientious strategy to redress the indifference and neglect Manuel had suffered for the first eighteen years of his life. Scarcely three months after his father’s demise, Infante Manuel confirms a privilege given by Alfonso X to the city of Palencia on 1 August 1252, the very first privilegio rodado of the new king’s reign.1 It is worthy of note that this document was also confirmed by nine other individuals who were signatories to the two previous charters of March and December 1248 confirmed by Infante Manuel: Alvaro López de Haro, Alfonso Téllez, Pedro Guzmán, Fernando Ordóñez, Manuel’s two ­uncles Martín Alfonso and Martín Gil, Rodrigo Gómez, Rodrigo Flores, and Alfonso García, brother of Alfonso X’s mayordomo, Juan García de Villamayor, and later the ayo of Juan Manuel. The Villamayor family would play an early and important role in the reign of Alfonso X and particularly in the life of Infante Manuel and his son Juan Manuel, from which we can deduce the close relationship that existed between the monarch and his youngest and most-­ favoured brother. When the partition of Seville was promulgated a year later in May 1253, Infante Manuel’s ayo and the members of the ­Villamayor family were richly compensated according to the archives of the ­Repartimiento de Sevilla, an invaluable and indispensable historical document for an analysis of that particular moment in time.2 Whereas Manuel seems not to have confirmed any royal chancery documents during his father’s reign, he henceforth figures prominently in most but not all, as Lomax claims.3 In fact, the several occasions on which Manuel does not confirm will conveniently allow us to verify his presence elsewhere. He is conspicuously absent in royal diplomas issued in Valladolid during April 1258 and entirely missing from those endorsed between December 1259 and November 1260, when he



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

31

headed the king’s embassy to Rome. He is again absent in June 1262 and from December 1266 to January 1268. While the king was in Murcia during 1270–71, Manuel was in Seville, and these are merely a few of the many instances we find in the infante’s itinerary that do not necessarily coincide with Alfonso’s. Several days later, on 5 August, the king issued another privilegio rodado to the Cathedral of Seville confirmed by, among others, “Don Alffonso de Molina, Don Frederic, Don Enrric, Don Manuel, Don  ­Fferrando, don Felipe ..., Don Sancho.”4 The ensuing days and months of September and October were dedicated to the organization and promulgation of two general assemblies resembling cortes in ­Seville, with the fall conclave devoted to the consejos or Councils of ­Castile and the winter session to the Councils of León.5 The posturas or ordinances enacted were subsequently circulated throughout the realm, and most have since been published in modern editions.6 In these deliberations during the fall of 1252, Infante Manuel, after e­ ighteen years of obscurity, suddenly emerges as one of the king’s closest advisors, as we can see from the preamble to a charter given by the king to the town council of Burgos on 12 October, a document whose format is mirrored by most of the other ordinances promulgated during this assembly: “And I made decrees with the advice and consent of my uncle Don Alfonso de Molina, and of my brothers Don Fadrique, and Don Felipe and Don Manuel and of the bishops and noblemen and knights of the chivalric orders and of the good men of the towns and other good men who met with me.”7 Infante Enrique, who had earlier refused to pay homage to his brother as the heir apparent, is conspicuously absent from the king’s council. The astonishing number of laws, proscriptions, and prohibitions promulgated during the cortes touching on all aspects of daily life, including sumptuary edicts enforcing strict dress codes, decrees concerning every facet of the economy, and rules governing all types of social relationships, says much about the new ruler’s rigorous moral conventions and intolerant religious convictions, all of which are here translated into a remarkable document of active government intervention in every facet of daily life. Alfonso’s penchant for micromanagement at the very outset of his reign, his need to be in control of every aspect of his administration and, indeed, his belief that royal attention to minor details was an integral element of good government were not lost on Manuel. This same benevolent but intolerant and dictatorial attitude that ultimately led the monarch to misfortune precisely defines and even predicts the traits Manuel later displayed in the administration of his demesne. In due course, they would be passed on and assimilated

32

Dawn of a Dynasty

into the philosophical and political values espoused by his son Juan Manuel, who was well known for his own rigid and inflexible adherence to the strictest moral and ethical codes. As soon as the cortes of Castile had concluded, Alfonso X and his entourage commenced preparations for a journey to Badajoz during the third week in November, where the monarch would meet with ­Alfonso III of Portugal concerning Castilian rights in the Algarve and the marriage of his daughter, Beatrice. Infante Manuel accompanied his brother during this sojourn, where on 20 November, together with his close friend Alfonso García and the uncles of the bride, Pedro Núñez and Nuño Guillén (brothers of Beatrice’s mother, Mayor Guillén de Guzmán), he endorsed two documents despatched by Alfonso X to the town council of Oviedo confirming previous charters issued by his grandfather, Alfonso IX, and father, Fernando III.8 The new year 1253 found Infante Manuel back in Seville, where he continued to play an important role in the cortes now taking place there for the various Councils of León, confirming four documents from ­January to March in which his elevated status in his brother’s ­administration is revealed by the customary order in which the signatories appear: “Don Alonso de Molina ... Don Frederic ... Don ­Manuel.”9 This same hierarchy would be observed in the monarch’s forthcoming partition of Seville, which he would make public in May of that year and in which the most important members of his court, including Infante ­Manuel, would be rewarded with donadíos mayores or major grants, large tracts of land in the most desirable agricultural zones of the city. Ahead of the public announcement of land grants in May, and as if to make clear that he was specifically expressing a preference for his youngest brother over the other members of his court, Alfonso X ­issued a charter to Infante Manuel on 28 March bestowing upon him the ­village of Heliche: I give and confer upon you my brother, Infante Don Manuel, the village called Felich with its forests, meadows, springs, and water sources, with its olive groves, vineyards, and cultivated land, with all entries and exits and with all boundaries and with all rights and with all appurtenances such as existed during the time of the Moors. And I bequeath to you the aforesaid village and I confer upon you these hereditary rights to have and hold forever, free and clear, for yourself and your children and your grandchildren and all those who may descend from you and who are your heirs, to give, to sell, to mortgage, to exchange, and to do with it whatsoever you will as if it were your own.10



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

33

The grant is also recorded two months later, on 1 May, in the Repartimiento de Sevilla: This is the inheritance which King Don Alfonso gave to his brother, Infante Don Manuel: he gave to him Feliche which is within the boundaries of Solúcar, and there are within it ten thousand pies of olive and fig trees and as surveyed, one hundred and forty-five arançadas and it was valued at two hundred arançadas.11

Feliche, Heliche, or Eliche is located about twelve kilometres to the northwest of Seville and a few kilometres north of what is today Sanlúcar la Mayor.12 Situated in the Aljarafe region, which Julio ­ González, editor of the Repartimiento de Sevilla, terms “the most highly valued of all the territory in Seville for its wealth and the quality of its agricultural products,”13 the district continues today to be one of the richest areas of olive production in the world. The district of ­Sanlúcar was ceded primarily to the cillero real or royal granaries together with members of the royal household involved in provisioning the court and specifically to Juan García de Villamayor, the king’s majordomo, and his staff.14 Infante Fadrique was also a recipient of a substantial grant nearby in this same area consisting of seven thousand pies of o ­ live groves, fig o ­ rchards, and vineyards in Sanlúcar Albaida,15 while the ­infantes Felipe and Sancho, archbishops-elect of Seville and ­Toledo, received a striking grant of thirty thousand pies of olive groves in Buyena or ­Rebujena, some twenty kilometres to the southwest of ­Seville in yet another ­exceptionally ­fertile region. On the other hand, Infante ­Enrique was assigned only two thousand pies of olive groves and fig orchards worth six thousand baskets of figs in Borgabenalcadí in the vicinity of Alcalá de Guadaira, located in an inferior agrarian area to the ­southeast of Seville.16 Alfonso, then, had displayed ­patent favoritism in the donadíos he allotted to his brothers, and clearly ­Manuel was among those most favoured by the king’s largesse. Now, for the first time in his life, the forgotten sibling possessed not only a title but a landed estate, a ­demesne that would provide him with a substantial and much-needed income as he began to assert himself as a significant player in the royal entourage and to leverage his close relationship with the newly proclaimed monarch. Curiously, the Repartimiento does not mention Pedro López de ­Ayala as Infante Manuel’s ayo, but it does record a donadío or land grant to “Gonçalo Domínguez, ayo de don Manuel,” who was given thirty ­aranzadas and six yugadas in Pilas in the vicinity of Aznalcázar (2.73). In a subsequent section of the Repartimiento that repeats the first, we find

34

Dawn of a Dynasty

“García Domíngues, ayo de don Manuel” (2.245), and this might logically lead us to conclude there were two ayos with the same last name. The confusion, however, is easily dispelled by the consistent manner in which the Repartimiento reiterates the names, places, and grants of earlier sections in subsequent sections in approximately the same ­order as first given. In the first instance we find “Pilas, which the king named Torre del Rey, which is in the vicinity of Aznalcázar ... and those who received the grants are retainers of King Alfonso and he also gave them the harvest rights in Alacaz ...” (2.69–73). There follows a long list of ­individuals including “Gonçalo Domínguez, ayo de don Manuel ... Sancho Domínguez ... Juan Pérez ... García Domínguez ... Lázaro Pérez” (2.73). In a subsequent section that repeats the grant, we find “Pilas, which the king renamed Torre del Rey, and those who r­ eceived grants here are retainers of King Alfonso and they also received the harvest rights in Alacaz ... García Domínguez, ayo de don Manuel ... Sancho Domingo ... Juan Peres ... García Domínguez ... Lázaro ­Peres, etc.” (2.242–45). Here, after “in Alacaz,” the text replaces “­ Gonzalo Domínguez” with “García Domínguez,” but the fact that “García Domínguez” is cited again in this same text in exactly the same order as in the preceding section, after “Juan Peres” and before “Lázaro Peres, allows us to conclude that this subsequent section confused “Gonzalo” with “García” following “in Alacaz.” Having determined that Infante Manuel’s second ayo was ­Gonzalo and not García Domínguez, we are faced with the difficult task of ­determining just who he was, and the Repartimiento de Sevilla further confuses the issue by referring to no fewer than ten individuals with the same name.17 There are, however, only two individuals named ­Gonzalo Domínguez who receive exactly the same land grant in each of two ­sections of the Repartimiento: the brother-in-law of the bishop of ­Segovia and Infante Manuel’s ayo, each with a grant of thirty aranzadas and six yugadas in Aznalcázar. The identification of the infante’s guardian with the brother-in-law of Remondo de Losana, bishop of Segovia, is all the more compelling when we consider that the same Dominican friar was also, according to Juan Manuel, the person responsible for christening his father. Remondo had served as Fernando III’s confessor and ­personal secretary from 1250 until the king’s death in 1252 and, during the partition of Seville the following year, was the recipient of numerous land grants. He would go on to become Alfonso’s notary, the godfather of Infante Sancho and, in 1259, the archbishop of Seville. He may have studied in Paris with Manuel’s brother, Infante Felipe, during 1244–45, and their friendship may well have led to his eventual selection as archbishop to replace Felipe, who held the post of archbishop-elect



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

35

until 1258.18 By securing the appointment of his brother-in-law, G ­ onzalo Domínguez, as Infante Manuel’s ayo, Don ­Remondo would have further strengthened his position at court with the royal family, and in so doing fashioned a life-long sphere of influence s­ urrounding the young prince and his heirs. Furthermore, if Infante Manuel’s second ayo was a notary, it seems logical to infer that he was not chosen as a knight to instruct the young man in the art of combat and chivalry, as was his first ayo, Pedro Lopez de Ayala, but as a tutor engaged to instruct him in the liberal arts. This decision would have been made for him by his older brother as a member of Infante Alfonso’s mesnada and is entirely in keeping with the future monarch’s own life-long emphasis on the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge. Inexplicably, Ballesteros makes no reference to the “ayo de don ­Manuel” mentioned in the Repartimiento de Sevilla. On the other hand, he claims that Bishop Remondo’s brother-in-law was not ­ Gonzalo but García Domínguez, who was the recipient of a land grant in ­Cultullana,19 though the Repartimiento refers to him in the “­ Cultullena” ­section and two other subdivisions as “Gonçalo Domínguez, cunnado del obispo.”20 Further confusing the issue, Ballesteros, citing a land sale dated in ­Seville on 25 August 1253, declares that the seller, who identifies himself as “Garcj Domínguez de Segouia criado de don Garci Pérez escriuano del Rey,” was both Remondo’s brother-in-law and later ­Alfonso X’s notary in Andalusia who had secured his position through the bishop’s influence.21 We know from the Repartimiento de ­Murcia and Torres Fontes that the king’s notary in Andalusia was García Domínguez de Cuéllar, not Segovia.22 In this capacity, he functioned as one of three partitioners during the fifth partition of Murcia in 1272, a task he shared with Enrique Pérez de Harana, Alfonso’s repostero mayor and adelantado mayor of the kingdom of Murcia (1272–74), and Juan García de Toledo, Alfonso’s royal scribe.23 García Domínguez, ­Alfonso’s notary in ­Andalusia, first confirms in this post on 18 April 1272 and before that date is found in several chancery documents but without a specific title.24. Since he refers to himself in the 25 August 1253 sales document as the criado or servant of Garci Pérez de Toledo, ­Alfonso’s notary in Andalusia from at least 5 March 125425 until 2 ­October 1259,26 it is perhaps this detail that induced Ballesteros to assume that he had succeeded his master in the notary position.27 At the same time he was engaged in partitioning the kingdom of ­Seville, Alfonso was also occupied with the division of the kingdom of Murcia, which would eventually become the seat of Infante Manuel’s political influence. Murcia, conquered by Alfonso in 1243, represented a signal accomplishment for the young prince, who was only twenty-two

36

Dawn of a Dynasty

years old. Over the intervening decades, he would develop an enduring attachment to the region and its people whose special significance can best be comprehended in the monarch’s own words when, sick, disillusioned, and close to death on 22 January 1284, he commanded in his last will and testament that “our body be interred in our monastery of Santa María la Real in Murcia, which is the seat of this kingdom, the first place that God wished us to conquer in his service and to the honour of King Fernando, and ours and of our land.”28 Just as Córdoba and Seville had stood as the crowning achievements of his father’s reign, Murcia was his particular triumph, and throughout his life the region and its problems would continue to occupy a prominent position in his political strategy. Manuel’s essential role in the repopulation and development of Murcia and his own substantial holdings in this region convey both Alfonso’s personal trust in him and the distinct impression that his younger brother was, in fact, the king’s alter ego in this, his most cherished enterprise. Though we can list most of Manuel’s holdings at the time of his death in 1283, the matter of how and when he acquired them has never been well established. A brief historical overview of the region from 1238 to 1252 will provide us with the facts we need to adequately ­assess the infante’s future acquisitions in that area and the gradual development of what would, in time, come to be known as the “Tierra de Don ­Manuel,” which Juan Manuel reports arose from the legendary ­kingdom of ­Alhofra “that was always like a separate realm or domain that was never subject to any ruler.”29 Nevertheless, the expression “Tierra de Don Manuel” is not found in existing documents until at least 1266, when Alfonso issued a charter establishing the boundaries of the ­bishopric of Cartagena30 (Fig. 1). Following the conquest of Valencia on 28 September 1238, Jaime I the Conqueror, ruler of Aragón, turned his sights on the kingdom of ­Murcia, a decision that would ultimately bring him into conflict with his future son-in-law, Infante Alfonso. Indeed, the quarrel that then arose between them would only be settled when Alfonso married Jaime’s daughter, Violante, more than ten years later in 1249 (Figs. 13, 14). At this point in time, however, Jaime was intent on taking advantage of the chaos that ruled in Murcia following the death of the caliph, ­Mohammed ibn Hud, in April or May 1238. Nevertheless, Jaime’s ­initial incursions in Murcia, Villena, and Sax during 1240 were repulsed and he was obliged to return to Valencia.31 Later that same year Villena, Sax, and Salinas were conquered by the knights of Calatrava together with a contingent of Catalán almogávares or light horse cavalry.32 About the same time, Albacete was taken by Fernando III, who then ceded



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

37

it to the consejo or town council of Alarcón in April of the following year.33 Shortly thereafter, Chinchilla and then Almansa were occupied by the knights of the Order of Santiago and their commander, Rodrigo Íñiguez.34 In 1242, Fernando awarded them Sierra de Segura, which was quickly converted into their main base of operations.35 Just as Fernando was prepared to despatch an army to Murcia under the command of Infante Alfonso, the king of Murcia, M ­ uhammad Ibn Hud al-Dawla, realizing the futility of any resistance, sent an e­ mbassy to Burgos offering to surrender the city and kingdom.36 ­Alfonso, with Pelay Pérez Correa, master of the Order of Santiago, and Rodrigo González Girón, Fernando’s mayordomo, entered Murcia on 1 May 1243, receiving in the ensuing agreement, known as the Treaty of Alcaraz, Crevillente, Alicante, Elche, Orihuela, Alhama, Aledo, Ricot, Cieza, “and all the other places in Murcia which were under the control of the Moorish king.”37 On 5 July of that year, Alfonso partitioned the ­kingdom of Murcia into a discrete number of feudal tenancies, including the following municipalities that would later be assigned to Infante Manuel: Elche was ceded to Rodrigo González Girón; Alcalá to Lope López; Jorquera to Pedro Núñez de Guzmán; Chinchilla to his cousin Nuño Núñez; Callosa and Crevillente to Juan Alfonso; and Hellín and Isso to Gonzalo Eanes Doviñal.38 A year later in March 1244, Alfonso conveyed Tobarra to the town council of Alcaraz.39 On 26 March 1244, Jaime I and Infante Alfonso reached an agreement concerning their respective spheres of influence in Murcia, fixing their signatures to the Treaty of Almizra in which certain matters concerning the future holdings of Infante Manuel were decided: Alfonso would receive Villena, Bogarra, Valle de Ayora, Almansa, Sax, Salinas, Aspe, and Monóvar.40 On 15 April, Alfonso ceded Elda to Guillén el Alemán.41 When Guillén died on 20 January 1245, his son sold Elda to the Order of Santiago.42 Elche was given by Alfonso X on 31 December 1244 as a donadío or land grant to his mistress Mayor Guillén with the stipulation that it be passed on at her death to her daughter Beatrice and any other children the two might have together.43 Sometime before 15 March 1252, Queen Juana, in light of her husband’s worsening condition, conveyed a significant number of ­ landholdings to the Order of Calatrava where they were to be held in custody, most probably to keep them out of the hands of Infante ­Alfonso, who viewed the numerous grants given to her by his father as a potential threat to his own future regency.44 Among these charters were the towns of Hellín, Isso, and Minateda, which would later form part of Infante Manuel’s domain. On 8 October 1252, Alfonso ceded Alcantarilla in Murcia to the Order of Alcántara in exchange for

38

Dawn of a Dynasty

“Hiso e Medinatea,” the very same Isso and Minateda of the charters belonging to Queen Juana.45 In late 1254 Juana left Castile for Ponthieu, never to return; it is very possible that these three possessions were given eight years later to Manuel.46 In this context, we must consider the fact that a year earlier, in 1261, Alfonso exchanged “Cambullon e Yelves e Torre de Alpechin,” which had belonged to Infante Fadrique, with the Order of Alcántara for “Alcantariella, e de los Molinos de la Acequia, que han nombre Almuztad, e los Molinos de Farquin que yacen en el Acequia de Daliof ... que son en termino de Murcia.”47 Though we have no specific documentary evidence to this effect, neither do we have any future transfers of these properties to anyone else. In fact, it seems that Alfonso typically enlarged his favourite brother’s demesne without the benefit of any formal decrees; we know that the lands were later his because they are mentioned as such in the context of subsequent references to the infante and his various activities. Soon after he ascended the throne on 29 August 1252, Alfonso decreed the division of the district of Alicante into the aldeas or villages of Novelda, Aspe el Viejo, Aspe el Nuevo, Monforte, Agost, Busot, and Aguas, of which Novelda and Aspe would, in time, be ceded to ­Infante Manuel.48 On 4 August 1253 Sancho Sánchez de Mazuelo, one of Fernando III’s most distinguished warriors during the conquest of Murcia, exchanged Alcaudete, Rexín, Ontur, and Albatana, among ­ other properties, with the Order of Santiago for Elda, which the Order had purchased in 1245.49 Sánchez de Mazuelo was a life-long friend and advisor of Infante Manuel and a witness to the last will and testament given by the dying prince in Peñafiel on 20 December 1283. There can be no doubt, then, that even at this early stage in Manuel’s ascendancy his brother was making plans to create a domain for him in Murcia. For the rest of the year 1253, Infante Manuel remained with the sovereign in Seville, where from 7 May to 20 December he confirmed seventeen documents issued by the royal chancery, strategizing with his brother and counselling him with regard to events.50 For the king, having spent nearly the entire first year of his reign in the partition and resettlement of Seville, now turned his attention to other matters of territorial interest, issues that would ultimately have important repercussions for Infante Manuel. Undoubtedly encouraged by the notable results he had achieved in the partition of Andalusia, the ambitious monarch was determined to extend his territorial acquisitions to other areas both within and without the Iberian Peninsula. The opportunities to implement his expansionist policies were not long in coming, quickly presenting themselves in a cascade of fortuitous events for the Castilian.



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

39

Sometime during the beginning of the year 1253, Alfonso X appears to have reached an agreement with Gaston VII, Viscount of Béarn, and the inhabitants of Bordeaux in the Duchy of Gascony to intervene in their escalating conflict with England over excessive taxation and political interference. Alfonso’s great-grandmother, Eleanor of England, had brought Gascony as a dowry to her marriage with his great-grandfather, Alfonso VIII, in 1177, and the king now envisioned that his support of the rebels might allow him to renew Castilian influence in the r­ egion.51 In July of that same year, Thibault I, king of Navarre, died unexpectedly, leaving a widow and young son, T ­ hibault II, a situation that ­offered Alfonso X the opportunity to resurrect ­Castilian hegemony over a kingdom whose rulers had also been former vassals of his great-­ grandfather, Alfonso VIII. Seeing his own distinct advantage in the two recent events, the king was quick to comprehend that the G ­ ascons could be effective allies in his strategy to subjugate neighbouring Navarre.52 These territorial ambitions, however, immediately provoked strong reactions from the English monarch, Henry III, and Alfonso’s ­father-in-law, Jaime I, who now promised to defend Navarre in a treaty subscribed on 1 August 1253.53 Faced with the possibility of civil war at home and fearful of a Spanish invasion of Gascony, Henry III sought a diplomatic solution, proposing a marriage between his eldest son, Edward, and Alfonso’s half-sister, Leonor, daughter of Fernando III and Jeanne de Ponthieu.54 A covenant confirmed by both monarchs on 31 March and 20 April 1254 reveals that Alfonso X not only agreed to the marriage but also agreed to cede his rights to Gascony to Prince Edward. He would knight Edward in a public ceremony symbolic of the young prince’s implied fealty and receive a promise of Edward’s military assistance in support of Castilian objectives in Navarre.55 The last clause of this arrangement had significant implications for Infante Manuel when the English king’s ambassadors negotiated a marriage between one of Alfonso’s brothers and Beatrice, Henry’s fourteen-year-old d ­ aughter: “Promittimus etiam & concedimus, pro saepefato Domino nostro Rege ­Angliae, quod idem Dominus Rex det filiam suam praefato Regi ­Castellae & Legionis, m ­ aritandam uni ex Fratribus suis germanis cui voluerit; dummodo idem rex Castellae & Legionibus det eidem Fratri suo tales divitias, ex quibus possit illam honorifice dotare & sustentare, secundum quod decebit fi ­ liam Regis; & hoc debet fieri infra annum.” Henry III confirmed an identical promise in a separate document dated that same day.56 Though the agreement does not specify the name of Henry’s daughter, this may be ascertained from the fact that scarcely a year earlier, the English king had attempted to marry Beatrice to

40

Dawn of a Dynasty

Alfonso de Aragón, Jaime I’s oldest son with his first wife, Leonor of Castile, who had been effectively supplanted by the children of his ­ second wife, ­Violante of Hungary.57 The English envoys clearly stipulate that whichever brother Alfonso may choose, he must provide him with sufficient means to support ­Henry’s daughter in a manner befitting a princess. At that juncture, Alfonso was already at odds with Fadrique and Enrique. Felipe and Sancho had been designated archbishops-elect of Seville and Toledo, respectively, and thus were not to be considered. His two half-brothers, Fernando and Luis, sons of Fernando III and his second wife Jeanne de Ponthieu, were only about fourteen and eleven years of age, and ­Alfonso X would have had no motive to provide either of them with more than they had already received from their parents. Clearly, the king of Castile was considering the possible marriage of Infante ­Manuel, his favourite brother, together with the prospect of endowing him with sufficient substance and titles to justify a union with the English princess. Meanwhile, in the earlier pact between Navarre and Aragón signed on 1 August 1253, the queen regent of Navarre, M ­ arguerite of Bourbon, and Jaime I had agreed that Jaime’s daughter, Constanza, would marry Marguerite’s son, Thibault II, a union that would have been highly advantageous to Aragón.58 Jaime’s aspirations in this regard, however, would be dashed two years later when he was obliged to marry ­Constanza to Infante Manuel. By the first week of February 1254, Alfonso X and his court had travelled to Toledo, where he held a general assembly that, for the first time, is referred to as a cortes.59 The primary objective of the assembly was to proclaim Infanta Berenguela, born several months earlier, as heiress to the throne.60 Among other important issues to be considered was most certainly the growing conflict over the Navarrese succession and the very real possibility of war with Aragón.61 The presence and participation of Infante Manuel in Toledo during the cortes is documented in a series of at least nineteen royal charters and privileges issued from 20  February to 19 May, all of which were invariably confirmed by him and his brothers.62 By the end of May the king and his entourage had left Toledo, travelling by way of Córdoba to Murcia, where they ­arrived around 12 July.63 Infante Manuel accompanied his brother on the j­ourney and confirmed a document in Murcia on 22 July.64 Still in Murcia on 4 September, the young prince endorsed a royal privilege that contains a detailed description of the domain in the Albufera de Murcia he would eventually receive from Alfonso, in 1267.65 Years later, Juan Manuel would refer in the Libro de la caza to the “[l]agoons and swamps of Los Barcos and Caral and Almurady and Ladaxa and



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

41

Los Cabeçuelos that are called Don Manuel’s, and the canal [acequia] that Don Manuel commanded to be built” to convey water from the Segura River for irrigation in Elche and to maintain the water level for the ­fishing industry in the Albufera.66 The presence of Alfonso and Manuel in Murcia during this period was essentially motivated by a desire to create a tactical diversion in the area that would effectively open a second front against Aragón. To this end, the king and his brother conspired with Al-Azraq, leader of several rebellious factions in Valencia.67 The planned revolt of the Valencian Mudéjars in the spring of 1254 was specifically designed to divide and weaken Jaime’s forces and thus strengthen Alfonso’s a­ bility to threaten Aragón’s allies in Navarre. In the Llibre dels feits, Jaime I ­observes that the Valencian rebels were able to sustain their insurgence over a period of three or four years precisely because Al-Azraq was supported by ­Infante Manuel and Alfonso: “E durà la guerra bé per tres anys o per quatre, que Alaçrac parlava pleit ab don Manuel frare del rei de Castella primer, e puis ab lo rei de Castella.”68 The Aragonese monarch then proceeds to relate one of the most sordid episodes of the uprising, the flight of thousands of Moors to Villena, where Infante ­Fadrique charged each man and woman a fee for passage to Murcia: “E don Frederic, frare del rei de Castella, era en Villena que la tenia per lo rei, e llevava per cada testa de sarrai, d’home e de fembra, per cada una un besant: e pujaren b’segons que ens deïen a cent milia besants.”69 According to Jaime I, Fadrique was in charge of affairs in Villena and took full advantage of his position to enrich himself at the expense of the fugitives, extorting more than 100,000 besants in the process. The Aragonese monarch’s observations are revealing for yet another reason. During this time, ­Infante Manuel, at the age of twenty, had not yet been entrusted with any martial authority in Villena. Fadrique, ten years his senior, held Villena for the crown while Manuel continued to accompany the king as an advisor. Meanwhile, in October 1254, the royal court journeyed to Burgos to celebrate the marriage of Prince Edward of England and Infante ­Manuel’s half-sister, Leonor, who were respectively fifteen and f­ourteen years of age at the time (Figs. 15, 16). Several days prior to the wedding, which took place on 1 November, Edward was knighted by Alfonso in an elaborate ceremony described by Matthew Paris in the C ­ hronica majora.70 Jofré de Loaysa, ayo of Queen Violante, also records in his Latin Crónica that the king took advantage of the occasion to knight his brothers F ­ elipe and Manuel and his half-brothers Fernando and Luis de Pontis,71 but not Fadrique or Enrique, though they were certainly in attendance.72 Twenty additional chancery documents confirmed in Burgos by all of

42

Dawn of a Dynasty

the brothers from 27 November to 28 December testify to the fact that, superficially at least, the sons of Fernando III and ­Beatrice appeared to be on relatively good terms.73 Beneath the surface, however, both ­Fadrique and Enrique continued to harbour strong resentment against their older sibling and would never have consented to be knighted by him or, indeed, to submit to any public display of fealty towards him. More importantly, both infantes represented a substantial threat to the stability of the realm, and while Fadrique was content to bide his time, Enrique had already taken decisive steps to oppose the monarch. His actions would have important implications for Infante Manuel’s future. Enrique had distinguished himself in the siege of Seville; indeed, if we are to believe Alfonso X’s own history of the campaign as retold in the Estoria de España, none of his other sons fought as fiercely or with such conspicuous gallantry as Infante Enrique. But while the king certainly respected Enrique’s martial prowess, he was equally wary of the young man’s overweening ambition. We have already seen how the rift between the two had progressed to the point where in 1249 ­Enrique had refused to pay homage to Infante Alfonso as the lawful successor to the throne of Castile, and noted that Alfonso later, after his father’s death, effectively annulled the significant land grants settled on Enrique by Fernando III in recognition of his contributions to the conquest of Andalusia. Furthermore, when Alfonso promulgated the ­Repartimiento de Sevilla in May 1253, Enrique’s share was significantly smaller than those received by his brothers. He was allotted two thousand pies of olive groves, fig trees worth six thousand baskets of figs, and eight hundred aranzadas in the vicinity of Borgabenalcadí.74 ­Compared with similar grants in the partition document, this award is notable for the large quantity of fig trees, and their associated value in terms of the ­number of figs produced. Given the contemporary association of the word “fig” with an obscene gesture and its popular connotation of anything worthless or of little value, the language of the partition text seems almost calculated to convey malicious mockery.75 It is also clear from the Repartimiento that in 1253 Infante Enrique had many more feudal retainers in his compaña than any of his brothers with the exception of King Alfonso, and all of them were given substantial grants of land in the ensuing apportionment. It was even rumoured at the time that Infante Enrique had developed an illicit relationship with his father’s thirty-three-year-old widow, Jeanne de Ponthieu, an affair ridiculed in the poetic compositions of several troubadours in ­Alfonso X’s court, though this may have been yet another derisive device utilized by the monarch to scorn and diminish his rebellious younger brother’s growing influence.76



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

43

Alfonso X had also alienated other important figures at court, principally the Haro family, whose members had been replaced in the monarch’s affections by relatives of Nuño González de Lara, the king’s boyhood companion. One of those most offended by this palpable shift in loyalties had been the king’s own alférez, Diego López de Haro, lord of Vizcaya, who no longer enjoyed the monarch’s confidence.77 ­During 1254, when the Laras emerged triumphant in a land dispute with the Haros, Diego López made the decision to break with Alfonso and on 8 August met with Jaime I in Estella, where he and several other disgruntled nobles pledged their support for Aragón against Castile.78 Though we have no documentary evidence linking him with the plot at this time, Infante Enrique certainly had sufficient motive to join the conspirators. Authorization given earlier on 22 April 1254 by Pope ­Innocent IV to Bishop Remondo of Seville empowering him to pardon all those who had taken an oath against Alfonso X would seem to suggest that the conspiracy was widespread.79 While supportive of the rebellious nobles, Enrique apparently made no overt moves against his brother until the death of Diego López de Haro on 4 October left the conspiracy without a leader. Because the plot was contrived in secret, there is little documentary evidence available to record its development. Nonetheless, Juan Manuel, writing many years later in the Libro de las armas, reveals important segments of the intrigue as they dealt with his father, Infante Manuel. Though Juan Manuel’s principal motive was to detail the events by which his father had inherited the kingdom of Murcia, thereby conferring upon his son those privileges normally reserved for royalty, the story he weaves somewhere between fiction and fact sheds a good deal of light upon many of the most salient features of the rebellion and Infante Manuel’s prominent role in the politics of the time. An analysis of the narrative is revealing: King James of Aragón had four daughters with his wife Doña Violante: Queen Violante of Castile, Queen Blanca of France,80 Princess Constanza, who married my father,81 and Doña Sancha, who died in Acre ... And, as I remember hearing from Doña Saurina de Bedes, a good and honourable lady who raised Princess Constanza whom I married,82 Doña Violante, Queen of Castile, as a young girl living with her mother, deeply resented Doña Constanza her sister and, as I heard tell, she was greatly envious of her. And this, they say, was because there was no more beautiful woman in any land and her mother loved her greatly and was fiercely displeased with Doña Violante as was the king her father. And for all these reasons, the hate she bore her was so great that they say the queen greatly feared

44

Dawn of a Dynasty

that she would bring about her death by any means possible. And because Doña Violante married the King of Castile, when her mother the queen died, fearing that if Doña Constanza her daughter married in Castile that what she most feared might come to pass, she begged King James her ­husband to swear that he would never marry Doña Constanza to anyone but a king. And this was done so that the Infanta would not marry in ­Castile and thus would not suffer the evil that the queen feared might befall her. And after the queen died, this is what happened: there arose a great conflict between King James of Aragón and King Alfonso of Castile who was married to his daughter. At the same time, Infante Enrique, his brother, and Don Diego, lord of Vizcaya, had risen up against the king of Castile and they met together with the king of Aragón in Maluenda, a village in the vicinity of Calatayud, where they made a pact against the king of Castile and asked him for the hand of Princess Constanza in marriage to Don Enrique. And the king of Aragón said that he would do so gladly but for the oath he had sworn and they agreed that if Don Enrique could gain a kingdom that he would gladly give him the hand of his daughter the infanta.83

With regard to the historical accuracy of the account, it would, until this point, be difficult to refute Juan Manuel’s insider information, which appears to constitute something like a family tradition, well known to him and those who were most intimately involved with the subjects about whom he writes. His description of Violante’s jealous and vengeful nature is, in fact, confirmed by what we now know of the queen.84 However, her hatred and resentment towards Constanza represent another, more vicious side of her nature heretofore unknown. She had been married to Infante Alfonso in 1249 at the age of fourteen in an attempt to ameliorate the tension that existed between Jaime I and the Castilian heir apparent, both of whom had specific territorial designs in southeastern Spain, an area that had, in effect, evolved into a buffer zone between Castile and Aragón.85 No doubt her mother, Queen Violante of Aragón, was instrumental in promoting the union, and at her death on 12 October 1251 at the age of thirty-six, she may well have taken the precaution of pledging Jaime I to marry Constanza outside of Castile and only to a ruler who possessed his own kingdom, fearing otherwise for the safety of her favoured younger daughter. Following the defection of Diego López III de Haro and other magnates who pledged fealty to Jaime I at Estella on 8 August 1254, a ­rebellion was definitely afoot. The death of Don Diego two months later was most likely the incentive for Infante Enrique to come to the fore



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

45

and assume leadership of the insurrection. Though O’Callaghan believes Enrique had met earlier with Jaime I either in Estella or at about the same time as the covenant entered into with Diego López de Haro, there is no record of his participation.86 Ballesteros, on the other hand, contends that Enrique subsequently met with Jaime I in Maluenda, near Calatayud, in January 1255 following the marriage of Edward and Leonor in Burgos, when royal chancery documents disclose that the Aragonese monarch was travelling from Tarazona to Valencia in the area of Calatayud.87 We have textual evidence that confirms Enrique, Fadrique, Manuel, Fernando, Felipe, and Sancho were all in Burgos on 6 January, so that their presence in the area is not in dispute.88 The meeting in Maluenda was, in fact, attended not by the now deceased Diego López but by his young son, Lope Díaz III de Haro, who was only about twelve years old at the time and at an age when he would most certainly have found himself entirely under the influence of the much older and more powerful Infante Enrique. All of the brothers effectively resided with the king in Burgos until the end of February according to the evidence we have from seven documents they confirmed together during that time.89 As Juan Manuel resumes his story, he relates that “Don Enrique set out for the Moorish kingdom of Niebla, and he besieged it; and when he had taken it, he sent word to the king of Aragón to say that since he now had a kingdom, he should be given his daughter as it was promised to him, and the king of Aragón said he would be pleased to do so” (Armas, 1.129). In 1255, however, the diminutive kingdom of ­Niebla, comprising an area west of Seville, including Moguer, Huelva, and ­Gibraleón, was ruled by Ibn Mahfuz, a firm ally and vassal of Alfonso X who confirms as such in most royal documents from 1253 to 1261. Though he was eventually dethroned by Alfonso in February 1262, Ibn Mahfuz was never, until that moment, challenged by Castile and much less by Infante Enrique.90 In addition, then, to having fabricated ­Enrique’s conquest of Niebla, Juan Manuel confused the time frame of the events immediately preceding the infante’s open rebellion. While Alfonso X continued to pursue a vigorous legislative agenda radiating out from his base in Burgos, his brothers accompanied him, confirming four charters in Sahagún during the month of April,91 ­eighteen in Palencia during May and June, though Infante Enrique and Infante Manuel are conspicuously absent from the 15 June document,92 and eight in Valladolid from July to October 1255.93 Is it possible that Alfonso was aware of Enrique’s defection in the middle of June and had sent Manuel to investigate the matter, thus explaining the absence of both infantes at that time? Be that as it may, less than a month later,

46

Dawn of a Dynasty

the two were back with the royal court in Valladolid where they remained together until sometime after 10 October. If Alfonso suspected Enrique was plotting against him, he did not reveal it, and royal documents would seem to indicate that Enrique was not under suspicion at this time. Nevertheless, by September Enrique had taken unambiguous steps to assume the leadership of a revolt against his brother, and on the sixth of this month in Estella, precisely where Diego López de Haro had colluded with Jaime I a year earlier, Infante Enrique met with the ­Aragonese ruler and promised not to make peace with Alfonso X “until your plight has been resolved to your satisfaction.”94 That same day, Jaime in turn made similar commitments to Lope Díaz III de Haro, his brother Diego López, and his vassals Sancho García de Salcedo and Gonzalo Ruiz de la Vega.95 These, then, were the principal conspirators in Infante Enrique’s forthcoming rebellion, and it is clear that Jaime I implied there had been a previous agreement, alluding to the accord reached at Maluenda in January of that year. In effect, the details of that pact must be the same ones mentioned by Juan Manuel in the ­Libro de las armas. Now, with the support of the king of Aragón, Enrique would attempt to conquer a kingdom, marry Constanza, and become an a­ utonomous ruler in his own right. At some time after 10 October the infante returned to Seville, where he openly proclaimed his uprising against his brother. The news of his rebellion appears not to have reached the king in Burgos until the beginning of November, since ­Infante Enrique and Infante Manuel are both listed as signatories of two royal privileges issued there on 2 and 3 November.96 From this moment on, the royal chancery documents cease to refer to Infante Enrique, and instead of illuminating the issue, Juan Manuel’s narrative tends to confuse the chronological sequence of events. The information he provides, however, is substantially accurate, and we can profitably utilize it to reconstruct what actually occurred: “And then Don Enrique attacked Extremadura looting and pillaging as he went. And I heard tell from Alfonso García and other vassals of my father, Infante Manuel, that he went to Niebla to take up a defense against Don Enrique, his brother.”97 The rebellion, then, was in danger of becoming much larger than had been initially anticipated. Coincidentally, Juan Manuel’s reference to his father’s role in the suppression of the revolt is the only evidence we have of Infante Manuel’s intervention in this conflict, and without that information we would have to suppose that he had remained with his brother in Burgos. We have already documented Infante Manuel’s presence in Valladolid until 10 October and know that the king left that city for Burgos about ten days later. Since



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

47

Manuel confirms two privileges in Burgos on 2 and 3 November, his participation in the defence of Niebla must have occurred shortly afterward, as soon as Alfonso X became aware of the uprising in Andalusia. Fernán Sánchez de Valladolid’s Crónica de Alfonso X (CAX), written around 1345 in the reign of Alfonso XI, offers additional aspects of the revolt, though it is frequently in error and mistakenly places the rebellion in the year 1259: And the king was informed that Don Enrique had secretly met with various lords and knights of the realm who opposed him and for this reason the king sent Don Nuño to detain him. And Don Nuño went forth from ­Seville and when he came near Lebrija, Don Enrique was apprised of the fact that Don Nuño was going to arrest him and he sallied forth on the field of battle and there a skirmish ensued between them. And it happened that both were injured and Don Nuño was wounded in the face. And when it seemed that Don Nuño would be defeated because Don Enrique and his men fought fiercely, Don Nuño was reinforced by a large contingent sent by the king. And Don Enrique and his men were forced to flee the field of battle and returned to Lebrija and that night he left for Puerto de Santa María. And although the place was as yet uninhabited, there were ships there and he boarded one of them and set sail for Cádiz and there he found a vessel that was going to Valencia and he sailed from there to the kingdom of Aragón since King James, Alfonso’s father-in-law, was still living. And King James did not wish to have him there against the will of King Alfonso and ordered him to leave the kingdom.98

Though the CAX makes no mention of Infante Manuel’s participation, we have no reason to doubt his son’s assertion that he was there and was most probably among those despatched by Alfonso X to relieve Nuño González de Lara. Yet another source, a contemporary satirical poem penned by the king’s vassal, the Portuguese troubadour Gonzalo Eanes Doviñal, alleges that Manuel and Nuño were assisted by Infante Manuel’s uncle, Rodrigo Alfonso.99 In any case, it is most probable that Enrique did, indeed, escape to Valencia and the court of Jaime I, where he hoped to take refuge with the monarch who he still believed would become his father-in-law with the promised marriage to Constanza. For all intents and purposes, however, the rebellion in Andalusia was at an end, as we learn from a missive sent by Alfonso X to Juan Arias, archbishop of Santiago, on 9 November instructing him to confiscate the property of those who had aided Enrique in Galicia.100 Nevertheless, the Haros and their disaffected allies in Vizcaya remained a threat and Alfonso, assuming Enrique would now join the insurgents in the

48

Dawn of a Dynasty

impending struggle in the north, realized he would have to deal with them swiftly before the rebellion could spread further. In the interim, the English king, Henry III, had been actively pursuing the marriage of his daughter, Beatrice, to one of Alfonso X’s ­brothers. Sometime in October–November 1255, in a missive despatched to his most trusted clerk, John Mansel, he reveals that the brother Alfonso had selected was, in fact, Infante Manuel: Concerning the marriage of our daughter, the earl [of Cornwall] advised that our ambassadors respond with caution: and concerning this matter our ambassadors were unable to say anything nor do we have any information about the lands which the king of Castile will provide or that may be given to his brother Don Manuel ... And it would be highly inappropriate for our daughter to marry any other than a man with ample lands and possessions, and who holds his lands and possessions of his own free will and who may not be deprived of these by will of the king. Let this same king inform our ambassadors in what place and how much wealth he will provide or may wish to provide for his brother and how he plans to ensure these things for him and his heirs so that our ambassadors may report back to us concerning these matters and that we may take counsel thereby. And let our ambassadors take care that their words may not provide the king with the occasion to give or affirm these lands for his brother by which we may then find ourselves more greatly obliged to accept the marriage.101

Henry’s concern for his daughter’s financial future should she marry Manuel is a mirror of the infante’s current economic status and very revealing of his notable dependence on Alfonso’s goodwill in lieu of any assets he may have held separately. The English sovereign had made a great show of generosity in providing for his daughter-in-law, Leonor of Castile, endowing her with a considerable source of income in exchange for the promise of Gascony102 and displaying equal liberality in the numerous concessions granted to his son Edward prior to their wedding.103 Indeed, Alfonso’s own contractual arrangements for the marriage of his infant daughter, Berenguela, to Louis, crown prince of France, recently concluded by Infante Sancho in Paris in August, featured a dowry of thirty thousand marks of silver.104 Manuel, however, possessed neither sufficient land nor titles to sustain his claim as a suitor to the English princess, and Lomax’s contention that the marriage did not take place because of the existing conflict between Castile and Aragón is, in this context, untenable.105 Simply stated, Infante Manuel was still an impecunious prince in spite of his brother’s efforts



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

49

to improve his financial condition during the marriage negotiations. His economic circumstances are utterly revealing of Alfonso X’s relationship with his younger brothers, family members, and other feudal retainers: they all held their lands not as allodial estates but as tenants subject to the jurisdiction of the monarch, a fact well recognized by Henry III, who remarked that “in terra & potestate ipsius Regis nullus, ut dicitur, jus sibi vendicare potest in suis tenuris, nisi ad voluntatem dicti Regis.” Though often generous to a fault, Alfonso was ultimately an autocratic ruler, suspicious of any independent political power, an attitude that would eventually alienate those closest to him. Meanwhile, Enrique’s co-conspirators had taken up arms and were inflicting substantial damage in the area around Soria.106 From 12 to 18 November, Alfonso was in Santo Domingo de Silos, and a document from the latter date is confirmed not only by Infante Manuel, who accompanied him, but by the now discredited Infante Enrique, demonstrating how chancery documents tended to lag behind the current state of affairs.107 At the beginning of December 1255 the king and Manuel arrived in Vitoria, where they would stay until departing two weeks later for Orduña, the stronghold of the Haro clan in Vizcaya. Alfonso had determined that the most effective course of action would now be to mount a direct attack on Lope Díaz and the rebels allied with the Haros in Orduña before they could join with their supporters in Navarre and Aragón. According to the Crónica de la población de Ávila, Manuel was in the region of Soria, about to undertake an important offensive mission for his brother: After the death of King Fernando, our lord King Alfonso reigned and a war began with the king of Aragón and Don Enrique, his brother, and the vassals of Don Diego, and the king sent for all his vassals and the councils of Extremadura and commanded them to go to Soria and take it. And the knights of Ávila, with the greatest desire to serve him, hastily prepared and greatly urged all the citizens of the town to go there ... And Gómez Nuño and Gonzalo Mateos came to the king in Huebre near Vitoria ... and the king was greatly pleased and thanked them and told them that he was going to Orduña and that he had sent Don Manuel to Soria and he commanded them to obey everything that Don Manuel ordered them to do and that he would be with them shortly. Gonzalo Mateos said: “Lord, our custom is not to fight in battle unless by your side, but since you are so greatly pressed we will not observe our custom nor any other thing except to serve you as well as we can, but we would ask you that you send word to Don Manuel that he not deprive us of our rights which we

50

Dawn of a Dynasty

have from other kings and which we also have from you.” And the king asked him, “What rights?” And Gonzalo Mateos said that whenever they fought for the king, the town council of Ávila was always allowed to go first into battle and to carry the royal ensign and that if he believed they could be of service to him that they be allowed to go first into battle. And the king commanded his notary, Don García Pérez, to provide a letter for Don Manuel instructing him to give them preference over all the others.108

The king was encamped in Vitoria with his army and was about to march on Orduña some fifty kilometres to the northeast, where he planned to confront the Haros in their own stronghold. The same ­chronicle tells us that he was accompanied by Nuño González de Lara who, with Infante Manuel and most certainly his uncle, Rodrigo ­Alfonso, had recently vanquished Infante Enrique’s uprising in ­Lebrija. It was imperative that the rebels ravaging the land around Soria be subdued as quickly as possible to prevent the rebellion from spreading in that area, and the same three men who had so successfully quelled the disturbance in Andalusia were prepared to handle matters just as efficaciously in Castile-León. Infante Manuel had gained his first significant military experience two months earlier and presumably had performed his functions with such distinction that he was now, at the age of twenty-one, the titular head of his own military contingent. By 19 December, Alfonso had managed to contain the rebels in ­Orduña, where he despatched a charter on that date to the Cathedral of Zamora.109 He was back in Vitoria by 4 January 1256 and was joined there by Manuel around 20 January, when the infante confirmed several royal privileges on the twentieth and twenty-second.110 Though there are no official documents to corroborate the account, Pero Marín, a monk in the Benedictine monastery of Santo Domingo de Silos, has left us a contemporary record in his Miráculos romanzados, a collection of ninety miracles performed by St. Dominic between 1232 and 1293. Marín reports that Alfonso X arrived at the monastery on M ­ onday, 5  November 1255, and that on the fifth night, after praying at the tomb of the saint, the king had a dream in which the saint appeared to him and prophesied that Lope Díaz would capitulate and surrender ­Orduña, that the ruler of Navarre, Thibault II, would pay homage to him; that his father-in-law, Jaime I, would leave his kingdom and his children to him to do with as he wished; and that all these things would come to pass within tres lunaciones, or three months: When the king was in Soria with a great army and about to enter the ­kingdom of Aragón, King Don Jaime his father-in-law came to him with



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

51

his sons and daughters and placed himself in the hands of King Don ­ Alfonso that he might do with him and his children whatever he thought best. And then they married his brother Infante Don Manuel to the Infante Doña Constanza, daughter of the king of Aragón. And when the kings were reconciled with one another, King Don Jaime departed for Aragón and King Don Alfonso commanded his people to return to their homes.111

These events transpired just as the saint had foretold, with the possible exception that Thibault II may not have pledged fealty to Alfonso X.112 Soon after, the king and Manuel were in San Esteban de Gormaz, where the infante endorsed two charters on 11 and 13 February.113 In the meantime, though Enrique had been defeated at Lebrija in October 1255 with his supporters dispersed around Soria and the ­Haros subdued in Orduña two months later, the position of the king of Aragón was still undetermined and therefore a matter of the greatest concern. While he could no longer count on the backing of Navarre, he had forged a pact with the rebels and could still make good on his promise to aid them. Enrique’s whereabouts at this point are unknown. He had fled to Valencia, where he made every effort to renew his contacts with Jaime I. Here again, Juan Manuel’s account in the Libro de las armas helps shed some light on the dilemma and its outcome: With matters in this state of affairs, the king of Castile and Queen Violante, his wife, understood that the marriage [between Enrique and Constanza] would be very damaging to them and of great peril to their kingdom, and I heard tell that Queen Violante took Infante Fernando and Infanta Berenguela, who were only recently born, and set out on muleback, she on one and they on another, accompanied by her chaplain, and set out to see her father, King James, in Calatayud. And when she came near the town, she sent one of her footmen to tell him, without saying that it was the queen, that she was arriving with his grandchildren. The king, when he heard this, was greatly surprised and went forth to meet her. And when he found her, thinking it was one of her maids-in-waiting who looked like the queen, paid no attention to her. And she, as soon as she saw the king, her father, quickly dismounted the mule she was riding, calling out loudly to him. And the king, when he realized it was the queen, his daughter, was greatly surprised by the manner in which she approached him and did not wish to speak further with her. Once she was settled in, however, he asked her if her husband, the king, was alive and she told him that he was, indeed, but that since he, her father, wished to take her kingdom from her and her children, that she would prefer to come to live with him, because it would be better for her,

52

Dawn of a Dynasty

since she was going to lose her kingdom, to be in her father’s house and not in some strange land. The king was greatly surprised and asked her what she meant by this and she told him that since he wished to give her sister to Don Enrique, that he should realize that this meant that she and her husband had lost their kingdom. King James, being a good and loyal man, unaware of her deep deception and cleverness, told his daughter that he was in great straits, that on the one hand he did not wish for her and her children to lose their kingdom and, on the other, that he knew not what to do concerning the promise he had made to Don Enrique since he had already conquered the kingdom of Niebla and, according to the pledge he had made to his wife the queen, could not marry her to other than a king. Then the queen said that if he wished to, he could take counsel with the king, her husband, and together they could quickly conquer the ­kingdom of Murcia whose Moorish inhabitants were then in revolt, and could give the kingdom to Infante Manuel and Doña Constanza and in this way he could keep his promise and she and her husband and children would be spared from losing their honour. And between her complaints about the losses they feared and the great honour he would receive in conquering that kingdom where the Moors were in revolt and the fact that his ­daughter, Doña Constanza, would become a queen, her father was ­persuaded to grant her what she asked. And the king of Aragón went to Soria and met there with the king of Castile and they endorsed a marriage compact between Doña Constanza and the infante. And during all this time, Don Enrique was in Niebla.114

Once again, Juan Manuel has confused the chronological ­sequence of events. Violante’s trip probably took place sometime during ­January 1256, and though we know that Jaime I was in Calatayud from 24  ­November 1255 to February 1256, Violante would not have left ­Castile before December at the earliest, given that her infant son, ­Fernando, had been born on 23 October in Valladolid.115 Furthermore, Enrique had never been in Niebla, much less conquered this diminutive Moorish kingdom, and all the evidence points to the fact that he had already left Andalusia and was most likely with Jaime I, perhaps even physically present in Calatayud. Juan Manuel goes on to state that Alfonso, following his agreement with Jaime I, set out for Niebla where he defeated Enrique in battle, forcing him to flee. This account, however, contrasts with what we know of the sequence of events and is also contradicted by the Crónica de Alfonso X, which asserts that ­Enrique escaped to Valencia and made his way from there to Jaime’s court, but that “King James did not want him to stay there against the will of



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

53

King Alfonso and commanded him to leave his kingdom.”116 Juan ­Manuel even recalls several verses referring to Jaime’s betrayal from a romance or ­ballad that was circulating at the time: “Rey bello, que Deo confonda, / tres son estas con a de Malonda” (Old king, may God confound you, / three times were you false including Malonda). Jaime I, of course, had no alternative given the circumstances and, in all likelihood, Queen Violante’s embassy to her father was successful and fully explains the events of the next few months. Juan Manuel’s account is also supported by Pero Marín who, in the Miráculos romanzados, reports that the circumstances prophesied by St. Dominic came to pass within three months of the king’s vision, which took place on or about 10 November 1255. While Marín’s account is somewhat embellished, as was his earlier assertion that Thibault II became Alfonso’s vassal, there can be no doubt that the conflict between the two monarchs was finally resolved with the marriage of Infante Manuel and Constanza, and at the very least his chronology is accurate. We have documented evidence placing Jaime I in Calatayud between 7 February and 2 May 1256,117 and Zurita informs us that in March he was in Soria making peace with his son-in-law.118 Zurita, however, makes no mention of the marriage. Moreover, two documents issued by Jaime I a year later, on 8 August 1257, while clearly referencing the agreement in Soria,119 as does yet another document dated 11 March 1260,120 omit any allusion to the marriage. For these particulars we must return to Juan Manuel, who provides us with an account found nowhere else concerning the wedding and the events that led up to it: And King Don Jaime besieged Murcia and at this time, my father went to Calatayud to marry Doña Constanza. And I heard tell from Martín Martínez de Fazas,121 one of my father’s personal bodyguards whom I met when he was an old man, that the day they were married in ­Calatayud, he, with about one hundred other members of my father’s personal guard, was stationed around the church with crossbows while mass was celebrated, fearing that one of Don Enrique’s supporters might come to say that Don Enrique and the infanta were already married. And I heard say from others that when Don Enrique met with the king of Aragón in ­Maluenda, that it happened that Don Enrique and the infanta spoke ­secretly about marriage because they undoubtedly loved each other. And I was even told that one time when the infanta set out on a journey from one place to another, that Infante Enrique followed her disguised as one of her servants; and in this manner was able to speak with her for nearly three leagues during the trip. So it would seem from this that there was reason to suspect that there had been some talk of marriage between them.

54

Dawn of a Dynasty

And as soon as the infanta was married and Don Enrique was out of the kingdom, King Alfonso was no longer concerned about him.122

The fact that Manuel’s men feared some intervention on the part of Enrique’s followers suggests that the ceremony must have occurred soon after the peace accord was finalized in Soria at the end of March 1256 and before the terms of the settlement had been circulated and accepted by the other opposing parties. In this context, Juan Manuel’s assertion that the marriage occurred when Jaime I besieged Murcia in 1266 is erroneous.123 Alfonso X had arrived in Soria on 18 March and ­remained there until 27 April. Infante Manuel, together with his ­brothers Fadrique, Felipe, Sancho, Fernando, and Luis, confirm two royal privileges dated in Soria on 20 March,124 departing from there with the king for Sigüenza, where they confirm another royal p ­ rivilege on 6 May.125 Jaime’s sojourn in Calatayud with his family is documented between 7 February and 2 May. Given the proximity between Calatayud and Soria, roughly ninety kilometres distant, and the presence of all the parties in the area, it seems more than likely that the marriage took place sometime early in April 1256 and that Infante Manuel and Constanza remained in C ­ alatayud until the end of the month or perhaps early May, when they left with Alfonso for Sigüenza. Ballesteros believed the wedding occurred during Jaime’s documented presence in Calatayud in June but, under the circumstances, this appears to be too late a date for an alliance that was forged in haste and quickly sealed by the nuptial vows.126 Surely Jaime must have given Constanza a dowry, and it is appealing to assume that the terms may have included properties along the disputed border of Aragón and Castile in Murcia and Valencia. There are, however, no records of any such grants to either of the infantes, nor does Jaime ever speak of Constanza in any of the chancery documents issued during his reign. In fact, an official record referring to the marriage a year later explicitly excludes the kingdom of Murcia from the peace pact concluded in Soria.127 Perhaps the concessions the Aragonese was forced to make and the conditions surrounding his betrayal of Enrique and the Castilian rebels had become a painful episode he would prefer not to revisit. We must also remember that two years earlier Jaime I and Marguerite of Navarre had agreed to a ­marriage between her young son, Thibault II, and Constanza, a union that would have been highly beneficial to Aragón. Now, however, Jaime found himself forced by circumstances to marry his daughter to Infante Manuel, a prince who would never be a king, and with no apparent long-term political advantages other than the immediate cessation of hostilities along the



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

55

southern borders with Castile. Certainly he must have realized that any expansion of Infante Manuel’s nascent dominions in Murcia would inevitably come at the expense of Aragonese interests in the same area, and this could not but have provoked a lasting resentment towards his new son-in-law. Nevertheless, the significance of Infante Manuel’s union with Constanza de Aragón should not be underestimated. Alfonso X had ­married Violante in 1249 for precisely the same reasons and under similar circumstances: to bring about a cessation of hostilities between Jaime I and himself centring on Castilian and Aragonese territorial claims along their common border in the southeast of the Peninsula. Though Jaime I had conquered the kingdom of Valencia in 1236 and Alfonso X the ­kingdom of Murcia seven years later, the region between their two domains had, for a variety of reasons, been difficult to resettle with Christians. The very nature of the large land grants made in the area, primarily to the military orders and members of the nobility, assured that territorial acquisition and livestock grazing, as opposed to long-term agricultural development, would prevail. The continued presence of large numbers of the original Muslim inhabitants, the proximity to seaports open to invasion from Africa, and the constant risk of armed aggression from the kingdom of Granada all threatened to undermine the political and economic stability of the region. The symbolic presence, then, of representatives from both royal houses would seem to have offered the prospect of a buffer zone between Aragón and Castile and the promise of greater cooperation between the warring parties. Infante Enrique had envisioned a separate kingdom for himself in Niebla to the west of Seville, an outcome that would ultimately have endangered Alfonso’s relations with Portugal. His presence in Murcia would also have been hazardous for Alfonso X given the infante’s history of disobedience and deceit. On the other hand, the marriage of Manuel and Constanza offered some degree of assurance that territorial differences in the area could be peacefully resolved while affording Manuel the opportunity to begin to build his own centre of influence. Meanwhile, Henry III had not yet been apprised of the precipitous decision to join Infante Manuel and Constanza in matrimony, and treaties with the English monarch in this regard, together with those ­matters concerning the African crusade and the affairs of Gascony, were still being negotiated in London with the Castilian delegation headed by ­Infante Sancho and Garci Martínez de Toledo, Alfonso’s ambassadors to the Court of St. James. In a letter to Alfonso X dated April 1256, Henry indicated that he would be sending his own envoys to discuss the issues.128 Clearly, Henry III was still interested in strengthening relations

56

Dawn of a Dynasty

with Castile through the marriage of his daughter to Manuel. In fact, the English monarch appears to have remained entirely unaware of Manuel’s marriage to Constanza until more than two years later, when he mentions the matter in a letter to Alfonso dated 25 June 1258.129 Be that as it may, Henry’s intelligence in the matter was probably very well informed, and his reiteration of the issue at this point was most likely nothing more than a reflection of his own attempt to resolve what had been one of the original points of his agreement with Alfonso X. Several weeks before Jaime’s arrival in Soria at the end of the month, the king of Castile had received there on 18 March a Pisan embassy headed by Bandino Lancia, who formally acknowledged him as king of the Romans. Though it had no authority to do so, the Ghibelline Republic of Pisa was anxious to obtain both protection and access to future ports of trade, and by proclaiming Alfonso X king of the Romans had taken a step that in their minds seemed to be a positive countermeasure to the growing Guelf influence in northern Italy. Pisan recognition was, in fact, part of an unanticipated chain of events Alfonso had set in motion in January of that same year when he sought to ally Castile with the republic of Marseilles in an attempt to secure support for his projected African crusade. Suddenly, and quite unexpectedly, Alfonso X found himself at the centre of one of the major political issues of his reign, the selection of a successor to the Holy Roman Emperor, Frederic II, whose death in 1250 had created a power vacuum in Italy that would divide the continent into two opposing forces: the imperial-leaning Ghibellines and the Guelfs who supported the papacy. As a legitimate heir to the Duchy of Swabia, Alfonso X was delighted to find himself a viable contender for the throne of the Holy Roman Empire, and his quest in this matter would ultimately involve Infante Manuel, as we shall see below. Meanwhile, the presence of Infante Manuel and Alfonso in Brihuega is documented on 10 June,130 and by 5 July both were in Segovia, where the royal court remained until the end of October.131 Infante Manuel confirmed eight chancery documents from 13 July to 26 September,132 a month in which the king finalized his alliance with Marseilles and Pisa.133 Having taken care of these essential matters of international policy, Alfonso X now turned his attention to certain pressing issues in the kingdom of Murcia, not least among them those pertaining to ­Manuel’s domain in the Levant. In spite of the armistice forged with Jaime I and sealed by his marriage to Constanza, Manuel, undoubtedly with ­Alfonso’s blessings, continued to conspire with the rebellious leader of the Valencian Mudéjars, Al-Azraq.134 In the Anales, Zurita informs us that “Alazdrach persevered for some time in his uprising



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

57

and entered into secret talks with Infante Manuel, brother of the king of Castile who was lord of Villena, and afterwards conspired with the king himself against the king of Aragón in spite of the new peace agreement.”135 Zurita refers to Manuel as “lord of Villena,” and we must ask ourselves if he may have had access to documents that substantiate this assertion, since none are currently known. If we are to believe Juan Manuel’s claim that Jaime I had made a vow to his wife, Violante of Hungary, not to marry Constanza to any other than a king, it seems reasonable that Alfonso X may have assured the Aragonese monarch of his brother’s ability to support Constanza by bestowing upon him the lordship of Villena. In any event, this is the first chronological reference we have to Infante Manuel as “señor de Villena,” and it is very likely that these feudal lands and title were, in fact, created for him on the occasion of his marriage to the princess of Aragón. As lord of Villena, Infante Manuel now aspired to preside over a much broader dominion. Given the Aragonese political and military presence in Valencia, however, neither he nor Alfonso X was about to make any territorial claims by force. Instead, both were resolved to obtain their goal through a strategy of stealth and deception, conspiring with the dissident elements in the region headed by Al-Azraq. In this context, Alfonso X subsequently requested a truce for the Mudéjar rebel, and though Jaime I appears to have been fully aware of the Castilian’s machinations, he granted it in order to lay a trap for the insurgents, as we are informed by Zurita: “considering the treaty that the king of Castile proposed in order to take control of those territories he had not won by conquest, the king of Aragón determined to resolve the matter by artful deception rather than continuing the war, which he could only do with great difficulty.”136 Indeed, Jaime I was fully aware of his new son-in-law’s duplicity, as he recounts in the Llibre dels feits, where he asserts that even as Alfonso was requesting that he grant a truce to Al-Azraq, the Mudéjar had simultaneously accepted banners from Alfonso and Manuel that he proceeded to display over the castles and fortified places he had formerly ceded to the Aragonese.137 We should not wonder, then, as did Lomax when he remarked that there was no clear reason why Jaime I never mentions Constanza nor his familial relations with Manuel.138 The Infante was hardly a devoted son-in-law, and his marriage to Jaime’s daughter represented a political concession grudgingly made under pressure rather than any sincere desire on the king’s part for a lasting relationship with Manuel. The conspiracy between Al-Azraq, Alfonso, and Manuel came to an ignominious end in June 1258, when Jaime I forced the rebel to surrender and leave Murcia forever.139 Again, it is Zurita who informs us more

58

Dawn of a Dynasty

fully about the events of Al-Azraq’s departure: “He left under these conditions, having brought down upon the land great war and destruction as an artful and cunning leader. And since the king of Castile had supported him behind the scenes employing the very same ­cunning and deception, he was detested by the population in that region nor was he able to achieve that which he desired.”140 With prophetic v ­ ision, the Aragonese historian lays the scene for future rebellion in the r­ egion, but this time against Castile. The Moorish inhabitants, who had for some time been largely resigned to Aragonese control, were now incensed and resentful of Alfonso’s and Manuel’s attempts to impose their own arbitrary rule. Manuel’s early efforts to enforce his will in the region had been marked by treachery and deceit, though it might be better described as realpolitik, sowing mistrust and discontent that would fester for years to come and lead inexorably to the disastrous Mudéjar uprising of 1264. With matters more or less settled in Murcia, the royal entourage had, by the first of November 1256, assembled in Loracán (modern-day ­Loranca de Tajuña), some sixty kilometres southeast of Madrid, arriving in Xilibar near Belmonte in the province of Cuenca on the sixteenth and then convening in Arcas by the twenty-fourth.141 Making steady progress towards the southeast, the king and his court had reached Orihuela near the Mediterranean coast between Elche and Murcia ­ on 11  January 1257, traversing a route from Cuenca to Orihuela that would, in essence, bisect the infante’s future demesne, the Tierra de Don Manuel. Though we do not know what territory, if any, may have been provided to Constanza as a dowry by her father Jaime I, there can be little doubt that both Manuel and his brother were intent upon surveying the dimensions of the infante’s newly acquired territories, identifying areas and issues of critical importance while determining the extent of his responsibilities and the nature of the role he would play in the future development of this vital area. For the next six months, Manuel and Alfonso X travelled between Orihuela, Alicante, Lorca, Cartagena, Monteagudo, Murcia, Elche, and Alpera. The sovereign’s primary interest at the moment was to place the newly created see of Cartagena on a firm economic footing, as revealed in the numerous charters and privileges given to that entity. Because the commercial viability of the entire region was dependent on its ­seaports and their volume of trade with other areas of the Mediterranean, great effort was expended to secure and enhance the maritime facilities of Alicante, Santa Pola, and Cartagena with their inland populations of Elda, Elche, Orihuela, Murcia, and Lorca. Of perhaps equal importance was the king’s dream of a future African crusade whose success might



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

59

well depend upon the strategic collaboration of these same seaports.142 His ambitious new foreign policy would also require the imposition of new and more vigorous political and administrative structures. At the outset of his reign, Alfonso’s governmental authority in ­Murcia was primarily enforced by only two officials: Garci Suárez, the merino mayor or territorial administrator, and Pedro Ruiz de Olea, the adelantado mayor de la Frontera or territorial commander of the frontier charged with the defence of the region.143 The latter was replaced in June 1253 by Sancho Martínez de Xódar.144 Faced with the necessity of creating a more complex administrative organization in the ­region, ­Alfonso now appointed Garci Pérez de Toledo notario del rey en el ­Andaluzia in a document duly given in Lorca on 23 March 1257 and confirmed by Infante Manuel.145 Local administration, on the other hand, was entrusted to the newly created city councils of Cartagena, Murcia, Mula, Alicante, and Lorca.146 Manuel’s participation in all of these ­decisions is supported by his consistent confirmation of numerous charters during this period, including three in Lorca on 28 March and again on 23  May;147 ­Cartagena, 14 April;148 four in Monteagudo, 6, 8, and 20 May;149 and Elche, 25 June.150 Of particular importance is the charter given in C ­ artagena on 14 April in which Alfonso X cedes Aledo and Totana to the Order of Santiago in exchange for Elda, which, he states, he had already given to Infante Manuel: “Et estos lugares ­sobredichos les do por camio de Ella que di al Inffante Don Manuel mio hermano, que era suya, que me ellos dieron.”151 If Infante Manuel had already been given Elda, it is most likely that he had also received neighbouring Elche. In fact, if we are to judge by the number of extant documents linking Manuel to Elche in the next twenty-five years, we may state emphatically that Elche was his most important holding in Murcia and unquestionably the nucleus of what was later referred to as the Tierra de Don Manuel. This came about by virtue of the fact that Manuel was intent on creating a domain of his own that would parallel, both geographically and politically, the kingdom of Murcia held by his brother. Elche with its seaport of Santa Pola was strategically situated between Elda and the port of Alicante to the north and Murcia with the port of Cartagena to the south. Over the intervening years, Manuel would grant to the city of Elche those same privileges and charters that Alfonso X had granted to Murcia, as we shall see in subsequent chapters.152 Following the conquest of Murcia in 1243, Elche had originally been ceded to Rodrigo González Girón, Fernando III’s mayordomo.153 A year later Infante Alfonso bestowed Elche upon his mistress, Mayor Guillén de Guzmán, who was entitled to benefit from its rents until her death,

60

Dawn of a Dynasty

at which time it was to pass on to her daughter Beatrice and any other children the king might have with her.154 We would normally expect that Mayor Guillén would then have held Elche until her death sometime around 1263.155 In October 1255, however, Mayor also received the town of Cifuentes under the same conditions as Elche,156 and five years later in 1260, when she founded the convent of Santa María de Alcocer, she listed her holdings as including Cifuentes but not Elche, leading us to suspect that Elche had been given to Manuel in exchange for ­Cifuentes in 1255.157 It should be noted in this context that Torres Fontes claims Manuel received Elche in 1262 but cites as his source an unsupported document earlier adduced by Ballesteros, which in turn purports to be a charter appointing Infante Manuel as adelantado de ­Murcia.158 Subsequent historians have followed Torres without verifying this affirmation and, indeed, no other documents refer to ­Infante Manuel as adelantado until well after the death of Crown Prince ­Fernando de la Cerda in 1275.159 During the six months spent in Murcia between January and June 1257, Manuel was accompanied by his brothers Fadrique, Felipe, ­Sancho, Fernando, and Luis, who also subscribe the same charters. By the first week of July, the royal court had begun the long journey back to Burgos, arriving there around the middle of August. On 15 August 1257, the Feast of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, the king received a diplomatic mission from Germany, thus setting into motion a series of events that would have grave repercussions for the monarch and his entire kingdom over the next twenty years. The ­German ambassadors had come to offer him the crown of the Holy ­Roman Empire, and he declared that his decision, to be made in consultation with his brothers, sons, and other nobles, would be forthcoming within three days. His presumptive prudence, however, was a mere formality. In fact, he had carefully orchestrated the scenario for many years, and there could be no doubt about its outcome.160 The previous emperor and king of Sicily, Alfonso’s cousin Frederick II, had died on 13 December 1250 leaving an empire in disarray and a son, Conrad IV, who faced widespread opposition. Frederick’s troubled reign had split Germany and Italy into two warring camps, the imperial Ghibellines and the Guelfs, a papal party that supported the independence of Europe’s city states rather than the traditional autocratic rule of the feudal lords over whom the church had been increasingly unable to exercise any authority. In 1225, Frederick II married Yolande de B ­ rienne, daughter of Jean de Brienne and Fernando III’s sister, B ­ erenguela of Castile. Yolande was thus a first cousin of Alfonso and Infante Manuel. Frederick and Yolande’s son, Conrad IV, was Duke of Swabia, heir to



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

61

the kingdom of Jerusalem and, in 1237, had been elected king of the Romans. In 1245, when the church had reached a political impasse with Frederick II and Conrad, Pope Innocent IV deposed them both and subsequently manipulated the election of William of Holland (1228–56) as king of Germany. Upon Frederick’s death in 1250, Conrad realized he would be unable to rule effectively in Germany faced with opposition from the papal party there headed by William, and his solution to the dilemma was to assume his father’s title and establish himself in Italy as the king of Sicily, where he died in 1254. William’s death two years later left a significant political void in Italy and Germany that many were eager to fill. In an effort to ensure the ultimate triumph of the papal party in any future selection of Conrad’s successor, both Pope Innocent IV (1243–54) and his successor Alexander IV (1254–61) were aggressively engaged in the selection process. As early as 1247, two years after he had deposed Frederick II, Innocent had explored the possibility of tendering the kingdom of Sicily to Richard, Earl of Cornwall (1209–72), brother of Henry III, repeating the offer at Frederick’s death in 1250 and once again in 1252.161 Given Richard’s reluctance, Innocent IV now made the same overtures to Charles of Anjou, brother of Louis IX. After careful consideration, however, both declined the proposal. Charles would later accept a new offer of Sicily but at this point lacked the funds necessary to pursue the project, and Richard had larger ambitions in mind. Not only had the Earl of Cornwall’s sister, Isabel, married Frederick II in 1236 following the death of Yolande de Brienne, but his aunt, M ­ atilda, daughter of Henry II, had been the wife of a staunch Guelf, Henry the Lion, duke of Saxony and Bavaria (1130–95), all of which made ­Richard a most attractive candidate in the eyes of the papacy. Possessed of great wealth and suspecting he could first obtain the title of king of the ­Romans and later, by default, the crown of Sicily, Richard had artfully repulsed an initial papal bid. However, in 1255 Pope Alexander countered by offering Sicily to Richard’s nephew, Edmund, Henry III’s youngest son. Though Richard opposed Edmund’s candidacy, his brother the king accepted and, in the process, nearly led England to bankruptcy. In the meantime, Richard continued to buy the votes of the German electors, confident of his ability to purchase the Holy ­Roman crown. To complicate matters even further, Alfonso X himself had not been idle in this regard and actively sought the Duchy of ­Swabia as an inevitable first step towards securing the title of Holy Roman ­Emperor, supported by Alexander IV who that same year despatched a letter to the bishops, abbots, and princes of the duchy soliciting their defence of the C ­ astilian’s candidacy in hopes it might effectively block the

62

Dawn of a Dynasty

ascension of the Hohenstaufen candidate, Conradin, young son and heir of the late Conrad IV.162 Alfonso’s subsequent recognition by the Pisan embassy as king of the Romans a year later, in March 1256, had encouraged him to pursue the same prize Richard so greatly coveted, and with presumably even greater resources at his disposal. A papal bull from 1 July 1256 reveals that he despatched a trusted retainer, the godfather of Infante ­Fernando de la Cerda and bishop of León, Martín Fernández, to promote his cause with Alexander IV at Anagni.163 The Curia, anxious to ward off any attempt by the Ghibelline factions to promote the c­ andidacy of ­Conradin, was in this respect favorably inclined towards Alfonso; although he himself was considered to be a Ghibelline contender, he was certainly a more reliable and compelling candidate than the halfbrother of C ­ onrad IV, Manfred, who represented an immediate and tangible threat to the papacy.164 At the same time the French, who were then at war with E ­ ngland, had come out in favour of Alfonso X, and the papacy was not prepared to offend them by supporting Richard, at least until peace could be established between the two nations.165 When the German Kurkollegium, the college of electors, cast their ­ballots a year later on 1 April 1257, Alfonso had been able to purchase four votes to Richard’s three, and since the electors were not bound to respect each other’s choice, the result was effectively the election of both candidates. Richard, unlike Alfonso X who was burdened by the affairs of his kingdom, moved without restraint throughout Europe in support of his candidacy, an advantage that allowed him to be present for his coronation at Aachen on 17 May 1257. On the other hand, Richard’s quest for papal confirmation would continue to remain in doubt as long as his brother Henry III failed to satisfy the debt he had incurred several years earlier with the pontiff in pursuit of the crown of the Two Sicilies for his second son, Edmund. The English sovereign had acted impetuously in accepting Pope Alexander’s offer and now faced an enormous financial liability and the threat of excommunication should he be unable to comply with the terms of the agreement.166 At the same time, the Curia was not overly anxious to alienate either Richard or King Henry for fear of losing their support at this critical juncture. To further complicate matters, Alfonso had recently entered into an arrangement with the Ghibelline leader of Padua, Ezzelino da Romano, a fierce opponent of the papacy who, like the Castilian, viewed Manfred’s growing influence in Italy with alarm.167 Nevertheless, Alfonso was eager to pursue his own candidacy, and on 21 August 1257, after consulting with his brothers Fadrique, Felipe,



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

63

Sancho, Manuel, Fernando, and Luis, he declared his intent to accept the offer of the Holy Roman crown, committing in the process vast sums of money that he could only hope to raise through taxation and manipulation of the currency. The CAX relates the particulars of the transaction, though erroneously dating the event to 1268: And because the emperor of Germany at this time had died, the electors of the empire could not agree on a suitable German candidate. And because this king was famous in every land for his great deeds, his goodness and generosity, being in Burgos at the time there came to him messengers from the counts and dukes and the people of Germany saying that they were prepared to elect him and that in recognition of his nobility some of the electors had already chosen him emperor of Germany and that they were sent to say that he should accept the empire, that many were ready to receive him as emperor. And the pope also sent him letters in this regard assuring him of papal support. And the king, Don Alfonso, when he had heard their message, spoke with his brothers the infantes and with his children and with the magnates who were there with him and gave a positive response to the ambassadors with which they were greatly pleased, and he gave them large sums of money and sent them on their way. And thereafter he took counsel with his advisors concerning the manner in which he would pursue his candidacy and to support him in this endeavour he requested that until the matter of empire were settled that his people might provide him with two tributes every year in addition to the taxes and rents he was due. And all of the magnates, lords, and knights and the councils of the cities, towns, and villages in his kingdom authorized these payments.168

While both Richard of Cornwall and Alfonso X were convinced of their ability to prevail in the contest for the Holy Roman Empire, neither could foresee the endless negotiations and ruinous expenditures that lay ahead, and neither had yet received the indispensable papal approval without which there could be no coronation in Rome. As his brother’s most trusted advisor, Infante Manuel would soon find ­himself fully engaged in the ensuing diplomatic fray as a member of the ­Castilian embassy to the Apostolic See for the purpose of securing the pope’s consent. In the meantime, he remained at court in Burgos, where on 7 October he confirmed a royal charter in which the king e­ ffectively divested Infante Enrique of the right to collect taxes in Lebrija given to him by their father Fernando III in 1249 and transferred the privilege to the city council of Seville.169 In December 1257, the royal court moved south to Valladolid where, in the following month of January 1258, the king convoked the cortes.170

64

Dawn of a Dynasty

While the text of these deliberations states that Alfonso X took counsel with “mios hermanos los Arçobispos e con los Obispos e con los rricos omnes de Castiella e de Leon e con omnes bonos de villas de Castiella e de Extremadura e de tierra de Leon,”171 excluding any mention of his other brothers Fadrique, Manuel, Fernando, and Luis, their presence in Valladolid is corroborated by two documents that they all confirm on 5 and 16 February.172 By the same token, though the monarch’s imperial aspirations are not noted in the transcript of the cortes, it would only be reasonable to assume that they were at least discussed at this gathering. However, as Böhmer, Ficker, and Winkelmann first noted, Alfonso X was keenly aware of the widespread opposition his imperial aspirations had occasioned in Castile during 1257, and while confirming as king of the Romans in documents sent abroad, he avoided using his newly minted title in charters issued within his peninsular ­domain.173 A full disclosure of the king’s plans and a nationwide request for subsidies to fund the enterprise would have to await a ­positive response from the pontiff, who was still searching for a resolution to the e­ xtremely irksome double election that could ultimately benefit papal policies throughout Europe. Following the celebration of the cortes, the royal retinue prepared to welcome the arrival of twenty-three-year-old Princess Kristin or ­Christina of Norway, who had come to Castile to wed one of Manuel’s brothers in the context of an alliance between Alfonso X and her f­ ather King Haakon IV. In search of a reasonable explanation for such a partnership, Gelsinger has argued convincingly for Haakon’s hopes to ­secure control of the profitable port of Lübeck should Alfonso gain the Holy Roman crown and of Alfonso’s desire to engage Haakon’s support for his African crusade.174 The concept of such collaboration had first emerged two years earlier, though Gelsinger declares that “no reason whatsoever is given to explain why a delegation of Norwegians was sent to Castile in the summer of 1255.”175 The key to this supposed enigma may be found within the framework of the same negotiations that had been underway for an alliance between Alfonso X and Henry III ever since the first tentative agreements were forged to marry ­Leonor and Edward and perhaps Manuel and Beatrice. Henry III had made a solemn vow to lead a crusade to the Holy Land and now sought to have the pope excuse him from this pledge in return for a promise to aid ­Alfonso in a campaign against the recent Hohenstaufen threat to the ­papacy in the person of Frederick II’s illegitimate son, Manfred. Haakon of Norway had sworn a similar oath and was also attempting to rescind it. Gelsinger was unaware of the fact that Alexander  IV, a ­pontiff fully in favour of Alfonso, had agreed to absolve the two monarchs of their vows if they would redirect their crusading efforts against



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

65

Manfred and Sicily. In a papal bull issued on 12 May 1255 and preserved in British government archives, Alexander directs Haakon and his nobles, who had been relieved of their pledge to travel to the Holy Land, to join Henry III in just such a cause.176 The Norwegian-Castilian alliance, then, was sought primarily by Alfonso, who viewed the campaign against Manfred as a positive step towards the elimination of one of his principal rivals for the throne of the Two Sicilies. Asked to choose among Alfonso’s brothers, Princess Christina selected Infante Felipe, archbishop-elect of Seville. Infante Manuel was not a candidate given his recent marriage to Constanza of Aragón. ­Infante Fadrique, about thirty-five at the time, was perhaps too old. Infante Sancho, archbishop-elect of Toledo, had declared himself to be entirely dedicated to the church. Alfonso’s two half-brothers, Fernando and Luis, about nineteen and sixteen respectively, may have been, as Ballesteros asserts, too young to be considered, yet they were apparently never serious candidates, perhaps because it was believed they might eventually follow their mother, Queen Juana, who had since left Spain to take up her feudal estates in Ponthieu.177 What may well have inclined Alfonso in favour of Infante Felipe was his recognition of the prince’s patent lack of commitment to an ecclesiastical career and the realization that Felipe’s marriage represented an opportunity to install a more dependable and experienced individual in the see of Seville, ­Remondo Losana, bishop of Segovia and Infante Manuel’s staunch friend and ally.178 Felipe and Christina were duly joined in matrimony on 31 March 1258 in Valladolid, and Infante Manuel was most certainly in attendance, since he, Fadrique, Sancho, Fernando, and Luis all confirmed royal charters in that same city on 5 February, 16 February,179 and again on 10 April.180 Still in Valladolid with the royal retinue, Infante Manuel must have been present on 11 May to witness the birth of Alfonso’s second son, Sancho, who was then christened by the infante’s own godfather, ­Remondo Losana, bishop of Segovia. Remondo’s growing power and influence at court would culminate the following year in his appointment as archbishop of Seville to replace Infante Felipe. Over the coming years, as Alfonso X grew increasingly obsessive and irrational, Infante Manuel was one of the first to realize that Sancho would have to eventually replace his ailing father and thus began to slowly shift his ­loyalties towards his more sensible and pragmatic nephew. A week after the christening, Alfonso X left Valladolid, travelling to Olmedo, Medina del Campo, and Arévalo, about seventy-five ­kilometres to the south. We know Infante Manuel accompanied him at this time since he confirms a royal privilege in Olmedo on 18 May,181

66

Dawn of a Dynasty

another in Medina del Campo on 9 July,182 and two in Arévalo on 15 and 17 July.183 Significantly for Manuel, the charter given by Alfonso to the municipal council of Alicante in Arévalo on 15 July refers to “our merino mayor of the kingdom of Murcia or whoever may be serving as our representative for the merino,” implying that Garci Suárez no longer exercised this particular authority. He had confirmed a document in that capacity in Valladolid on 10 April,184 but five months later in a privilege given by Alfonso to the Cathedral of Seville on 13 September 1258, he no longer appears nor, indeed, does the office of merino of Murcia. In his place we find “Don Alfonso García, adelantado mayor del regno de Murçia.”185 The former adelantado de la Frontera, Sancho Martínez de ­Xódar, who had served in that capacity since 1253 and who also confirmed the 10 April privilege in Valladolid, is now absent, indicating that a significant reorganization of royal authority in the ­kingdom of Murcia had taken place in the meantime.186 This conjecture is ­buttressed by the presence of yet another new name, “D. Dias Sánchez de Funes, Adelantado mayor de la frontera,” who would continue to occupy this position in Andalusia for the next three years.187 The scope of these changes is all the more startling when we observe that one of the three privileges issued on 13 September is now confirmed by “Infante Don Manuel, the king’s brother and his alférez.”188 Since only the last of the three documents denotes Manuel as alferez, we may assume that the king had elevated his brother to this position of prominence and power on that very same day, the better to serve the monarchy in the influential ­negotiations that were about to be undertaken in the forthcoming cortes and, shortly thereafter, in a delegation to the pontiff in Rome. Infante Manuel would continue to hold the rank of alférez until 31 July 1274, when he left Spain, accompanying his brother to consult with the pope in Beaucaire.189 Following the death of Fernando and his return to Castile in 1275, Manuel once again held the title until at least 14 July 1276, the last date he confirms as alférez.190 A year later, his nephew ­Infante Juan had been appointed to the position.191 According to the Siete Partidas, the rank of alférez was the highest ­office in the royal court. Since the laws had been recently compiled with the active intervention of the monarch himself, it is instructive to see e­ xactly what he had to say about this particular appointment, ­especially given Infante Manuel’s unique position on several future occasions when his pronouncements appear to perfectly reflect the ­several responsibilities with which he was entrusted: And among these [officials] the first and most honoured is the alférez whom we have named, because he is charged with leading the army when



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

67

the king cannot be there in person and sends another in his place. And he must carry the royal ensign whenever the king is engaged in battle, and in days of old he used to judge men by order of the king when they had committed offences that warranted it; and for this reason he carried his sword before him as a sign of his office as the highest justice of the court. And just as his office is charged with protecting and enhancing the kingdom, when someone causes the king to lose an inheritance, a town or a castle and a formal accusation must be brought, he must do so, and be the royal advocate in this case. And he must also act accordingly in those things which are pertinent to the sovereignty of the king, if someone would diminish or conceal the rights which the king has over them, even if it deals with those who have done nothing to merit such an accusation; and just as it is his duty to judge honourable men when this is warranted, it is also his obligation to plead with the king for mercy for those unjustly accused. And it is also his duty to assign those who must plead the case of widows and orphans of high birth when they have no one to argue their case and likewise for those accused of doubtful crimes who have no advocate. And because of all these crucial things with which the alférez is charged, it is imperative that he be in every way a man of noble lineage, so that he may be ashamed of doing anything that would be improper; and likewise because he must judge high-ranking men who warrant such action. And he must be loyal and love that which is most beneficial for the king and the kingdom: and he must be perceptive and prudent since he must resolve the most crucial grievances that arise within the army: and he must be confident and wise in matters of war since he is the head of the army and the king’s soldiers in battle. And if such a man were alférez, the king should love and trust him and honour him: and if by chance he were to error in any of these aforesaid things, let him be punished according to his faults.192

Meanwhile, as Manuel and the court sojourned in Segovia, a ­ iolent thunderstorm assailed the city on 26 August 1258. The resultv ing ­damage was severe and, according to one contemporary account, “lightning struck the royal palace where the king was staying with many nobles and bishops and Martín Talavera, the dean of Burgos, died there and many other nobles and bishops were injured and the king was unharmed and this happened on the day of San Vitores at the hour of the midday meal, five days before the end of August.”193 A century later, historians critical of the line of succession from Alfonso X to Alfonso XI that had disinherited the children of Fernando de la Cerda, and ­partial to ­Infante Manuel’s lineage that had given rise to the ­Trastamaran dynasty, propagated a legend that predicted Alfonso

68

Dawn of a Dynasty

X would be overthrown by his son Sancho for having blasphemed against God and for claiming that had he been present at the Creation, a number of improvements would have been made. Juan Manuel seems to have been aware of the legend when he alluded to it in the Libro de las armas (1.122), referring to a dream Queen Beatrice had related to her husband, Fernando III, when she was expecting Infante Manuel but without elaborating on the contents of the vision. Juan Manuel’s relative, Pedro Alfonso (d. 1354), conde de Barcelos, the illegitimate offspring of Alfonso’s grandson, King Dinis of Portugal, provides an extensive narrative of the matter in the Crónica Geral de Espanha de 1344. He recounts that one day the king noticed the queen had stared for a long time at her son Infante Alfonso and begun to weep and sigh. When her husband enquired concerning the reason for her grief, she remarked that when she was a child a Greek soothsayer had predicted she would marry Fernando III with whom she would have eight children, and that after his death, her first-born son would rule and would be disinherited and cast out from his land except for a single city in which he would die because he had blasphemed against God. The conde de Barcelos continues his narrative, asserting that during his long reign Alfonso X frequently boasted of his ability to advise God on matters of creation, and that one day [a] knight from Pampliega by the name of Pero Martínez who had been raised by Infante Don Manuel194 saw in a vision a man dressed all in white who told him how it had been decided in Heaven that King Don Alfonso would come to a bad end and die disinherited ... And when the knight asked if there were any way that God might pardon the king, he was told that if he repented the sentence would be revoked ... The next day the knight left for Peñafiel where he informed Don Manuel of all he had seen and heard and the infante commanded him to refer the matter directly to the king. The knight went to the king in Burgos and told him what had happened and the king remarked that he had, indeed, made the boast about God and the Creation and a few days later he went to Segovia where a holy man, a Franciscan friar to whom God had revealed the very same vision given to the knight, advised the king to do penance for the accursed words he had uttered with pride, arrogance, and vanity ... and the king was enraged and declared that he had spoken the truth ... and the friar left the king’s presence and the following night, God sent a great tempest of thunder and lightning ... and a bolt of lightning struck the chamber where the king lay sleeping with the queen, burning the queen’s headdress and a great part of everything that was in the chamber and when the king and queen saw this they were greatly



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

69

frightened thinking they were going to die and the king began to shout and to command his servants to send for the friar but the storm was so violent that no one dared to leave the building and one of the king’s guards set out on horseback ... and returned with the friar and the storm was still raging ... and when the friar had returned, he heard the king’s confession and as the king repented and sought penance, the storm began to abate ... and the following day, the king made public confession of his sin of blasphemy.195

The politically motivated myth of Alfonso’s sacrilege, designed to discredit the monarch, his reign, and his royal lineage while conferring legitimacy upon the Trastamaran dynasty and direct descendants of Infante Manuel, had been purposefully anchored, of course, in certain historical facts, most notably the recorded thunderstorm in Segovia.196 When Diego de Colmenares published his well-respected Historia de Segovia in 1640, the otherwise creditable historian fully accepted the fictional account and even described the damage that could still be seen in his day, inflicted by a bolt of lightning that struck “en la sala nombrada del Pabellón” (221–3). While Pedro Martínez de Pampliega is nowhere found as a criado of Infante Manuel, he may well be a historical reference to one of two brothers, Martín and Pedro Martínez, who were married to Toda and Urraca, the two sisters of García Fernández de Villamayor, Queen Berenguela’s majordomo, Infante Alfonso’s ayo, and the father of ­ ­Alfonso García de Villamayor, Infante Manuel’s hermano de leche. He is much less likely to have been Infante Manuel’s trusted retainer and partitioner of Elche, Pedro Martínez de Jovera. Again, however, the myth appears to have been forged with just enough historical particulars to render it believable. In 1386, the argument was effectively set forth by Juan I in a discourse delivered to the cortes in Segovia: “We are legitimately descended from the line of King Don Alfonso and of his son Infante Don Fernando whose sons were disinherited by Infante Don Sancho and we are also legitimately descended directly from the line of Infante Don Manuel who was the son of King Fernando and King ­Alfonso our grandfathers.”197 By 1470, when the bishop of P ­ alencia, Rodrigo Sánchez de Arévalo, published his Compendiosa historia hispanica, Pero Martínez had become the instructor or ayo of Infante M ­ anuel, not his servant, a designation that would remain throughout the following centuries and down to this day.198 At some point towards the end of the fourteenth century, the legend was recast by an anonymous author whose version is extant in four separate manuscripts from that period, attesting to its widespread

70

Dawn of a Dynasty

popularity and suggesting its acceptance as a “historical” account.199 In this adaptation of the narrative, an angel appeared to King Alfonso [a]nd informed him of the sentence which had been handed down against him in Heaven and that the sentence was then revealed to an Augustinian friar who referred the matter to his prior who, in turn, apprised Infante Manuel as one who loves you as himself and he came within seven days to this city of Seville and said “I demand to know if you said such a thing,” and you declared that you had said it and that you would say it again, at which Don Manuel was greatly distressed and admonished you to renounce this blasphemy and ask for God’s pardon but you did not appreciate it. And so that you may know the power of God the Father, the sentence has been carried out against you ... and having uttered these words, the angel went away and said no more ... and within thirty days, the king had departed this world even as the angel had predicted.200

The fictional narrative subsequently reappeared in the fifteenth century in the context of the Arthurian legend and the prophecies of ­Merlin and was published in the sixteenth century in the Baladro del sabio ­Merlín y Demanda del Santo Grial (Seville, 1535).201 In the space of five months, from April to September 1258, the ­government in the kingdom of Murcia had undergone drastic changes. ­Infante Manuel was now the king’s alférez or royal standard-bearer, the highest ranking officer at court, a post formerly held by Diego López de Haro, lord of Vizcaya, until his removal for insubordination in April 1254. Garci Suárez, former merino mayor of Murcia, and Sancho Martínez de Xódar, former adelantado mayor de la Frontera, had been ­replaced by Alfonso García de Villamayor and Diego Sánchez de Funes. Alfonso García was the brother of Juan García de Villamayor, the king’s ­mayordomo, and an individual who would, in time, become the ayo of Infante Manuel’s son, Juan Manuel. These changes could only have taken place while Manuel was in close contact and consultation with his brother, and under the circumstances it would appear that he had experienced a political apotheosis of sorts, having finally risen from the least of the sons of Fernando III and Beatrice of Swabia to a ­position of prestige, power, and influence that he would exercise in the ­Castilian court for the rest of his life. There can be little doubt that much of this rapid and unexpected change of fortune for the young prince was ­directly due to Infante Felipe’s renunciation of the mitre of Seville and the equally swift ascent to power of Manuel’s friend and mentor, Remondo Losana, bishop of Segovia, soon to be confirmed archbishop of Seville and, for the duration of Alfonso’s reign, one of the most noteworthy arbiters of political authority in the kingdom of Castile-León.



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

71

During the fall of 1258, Alfonso X must have received word from his legates to the papal court concerning the extent and nature of the pontiff’s support for his campaign to claim the imperial title. Richard of Cornwall had already been crowned in Aachen on 17 May 1257 and fully anticipated the pope’s forthcoming approval for a formal coronation in Rome, having expended vast sums in the process, one aptly described by a contemporary German chronicler who exclaimed that Richard ­“effudit pecuniam ante pedes principium sicut aquam ... De  pecunia eius multa incredibilia sonuerunt.”202 Alfonso’s Roman ­ambassadors must have stressed the need for him to act more aggressively in his own pursuit of papal approval in light of the fact that King Henry III had already despatched a number of extremely able emissaries to the Curia during the summer with orders to press for the pontiff’s endorsement of the Earl of Cornwall. They were a formidable group who ultimately managed to bend the pope to their perspective during the winter of 1258–59.203 Manfred’s coronation at Palermo on 10 ­August 1258 had ­effectively relieved Henry III of his Sicilian obligations, thus strengthening Richard’s position vis-à-vis the Curia. ­ Richard also ­appeared to be playing a leading role in the ongoing peace negotiations with France, a matter of greatest concern at Rome and one that increasingly seemed to incline the Curia towards the Earl of Cornwall. If ­Richard could reach Rome before Alfonso, he might persuade the pope to consecrate his ambitions. Though Alfonso had accepted the offer tendered by the German embassy on 21 August and must have been fully cognizant of Richard’s impending journey to the Holy See, he had not yet obtained either the necessary financial support or the approbation of his own people, which would ultimately be required to sustain such a costly undertaking. Nevertheless, he now appears to have initiated his own strategy of purchasing friends in high places: in October 1258 he awarded ten thousand pounds sterling to his cousin Henry of Brabant204 and the following month made a grant of five hundred marks annually to Guy of Flanders.205 Though the circumstances dictated a more aggressive campaign, Alfonso was apparently so confident of the pope’s backing that he did not respond with the degree of assertiveness so apparent in the recent activities of his rival, Richard. For the time being, he would be content to despatch his younger brother, Sancho, to the papal Curia, a strategy that would also entail a considerable financial outlay. Petitioners engaged in business with the medieval papacy were ­often obliged to incur enormous debts in the course of their visit to the Curia. Bribery and corruption were so pervasive that in 1199, when the b ­ rilliant but impoverished Archdeacon Gerald of Wales sought an ­audience with Innocent III to protest the attempts of Archbishop

72

Dawn of a Dynasty

Hubert of Canterbury to annul his election as bishop of St. David’s, and unable to compete with the eleven thousand marks of silver Hubert had already expended to purchase the pontiff’s support, Gerald won Innocent’s favour by gifting the pope with a number of his own books boldly offered with a veiled paronomastic reference to Hubert’s bribe, “Praesentarunt vobis alii libras, sed nos libros.”206 Nothing had changed in this regard when a century later Pierre Dubois wrote to Philippe le Bel that it could cost as much as ten thousand pounds to negotiate an agreement with the Curia.207 Sancho, archbishop-elect of Toledo and Manuel’s older brother, was born in 1233 and would reach the age of twenty-six by 1259. ­According to church tradition, he could not be consecrated in his post until the age of thirty and would therefore require papal dispensation from this ­impediment. But there had been exceptions in the past and he had, ­indeed, been appointed archbishop-elect in 1251 by Innocent IV at the instance of his father, Fernando III.208 Sancho had managed to maintain cordial relations with his brother the king in spite of recent attempts to assert the power of his see.209 There are indications, however, that he faced strenuous opposition from various sectors and may not have received the requisite respect due his office, perhaps owing to his youth and the fact that he had not yet been consecrated.210 There are also ­indications that he was deeply in debt and that he may well have hoped to resolve his financial predicament and other pressing ecclesiastical matters with a visit to the pope in Anagni.211 It should be noted, too, that Alexander IV had recently issued a peremptory bull that obliged all recently elected prelates to make a visitatio ad limina or trip to the Curia to be consecrated.212 Papal documents indicate that Sancho was already in Anagni by 11 January 1259213 and was probably consecrated there at least by 2 April.214 In a brief remitted by Alexander IV to King Alfonso from Anagni on 9 April 1259, the pontiff is eloquent in his espousal of the young ­prelate, whom he now recommends to the monarch as an individual most w ­ orthy of occupying the archbishopric of Toledo.215 It also ­appears that Infante Sancho was accompanied by Maestre Lope Diego, treasurer of the cathedral chapter of Toledo, who evidently formed part of the d ­ elegation to Anagni, since a papal bull of 3 April 1259, issued six days before the brief sent by the pope to Alfonso X, states that Lope personally pleaded his case before the pontiff: “In nostra sane constitutus presentia nobis humiliter supplicasti.”216 Sancho had personally come before the pope to promote his b ­ rother’s agenda, assiduously questioning the pontiff and the Curia in this regard. All present were much impressed by his royal bearing and support for



The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59

73

the king, and the pope now recommends the new archbishop to the monarch. On 17 June 1259, the pope issued a bull confirming ­Sancho’s consecration: “tuis iustis postulationibus clementer annuimus et ­ecclesiam Toletan. cui auctore Deo preesse dinosceris, sub beati Petri et ­nostra protectione suscipimus.”217 The inclusion of the term postulatio in the papal bull meant not merely a request for promotion but a petition seeking a waiver of some canonical impediment, in this case the fact that Sancho was not yet thirty years of age. ­Nevertheless, one month later in Toledo, on 27 July 1259, Infante ­Sancho now confirms a royal privilege as “D. Sancho, Arzobispo de Toledo e Chanceler del Rey.”218

3 The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60

While archbishop-elect Sancho was at the papal court in Anagni located seventy kilometres southeast of Rome, the king had travelled to Toledo, arriving there sometime during the month of January 1259, for the purpose of convoking cortes where he planned to present his ­campaign to secure the imperial crown and request funding for the matter of empire, a significant and costly enterprise. Strategically ­ ­located in the middle of the country, Toledo was his birthplace, the primatial seat of the church headed by his brother, Sancho, and a city whose population was solidly behind the monarch.1 Though no written account of these particular cortes has yet been discovered, they probably took place during January and had concluded by the end of February.2 A document issued by the royal chancery the following year provides us with Alfonso’s own succinct account of the matters taken up in the assembly: “We decided to convoke cortes in the ­noble city of Toledo concerning the matter of empire and to these cortes came D. ­Alfonso de Molina, our uncle, and our brothers, and the archbishops, and the bishops, and all the noblemen of Castile and León, and many good men from the cities of our realm.”3 While we have no written record of Infante Manuel’s presence at court until 1 July 1259, the fact that he confirms a charter in Toledo on this date would seem to indicate that he was indeed in attendance at the cortes of T ­ oledo in J­ anuary and ­February along with his brothers Fadrique, Felipe, F ­ ernando, and Luis, who also endorse the document. Infante Felipe had renounced the mitre of Seville in March 1258 when he married Christina of Norway and had been quickly replaced in this post by Bishop Remondo of Segovia, who was now the archbishop-elect of Seville, so that the reference here to “archbishops” did not include Felipe. Though Ballesteros asserts Archbishop-elect Sancho played a major role in the cortes, his documented presence at Anagni between



The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60

75

January and April 1259 precludes that possibility.4 The archbishops to whom the king refers, then, can only be Remondo de Losana, bishop of Segovia and archbishop-elect of Seville, and the king’s chancellor, Juan Arias, archbishop of Santiago. The national assembly consequently approved a double servicio or tax to finance the imperial enterprise, and with his funding apparently secure, Alfonso made no further preparations to send a royal legation to Pope Alexander IV, seemingly confident of the pontiff’s continuing support and encouraged no doubt by the positive reception his brother Sancho had been given at Anagni, his subsequent consecration as ­archbishop of Toledo, and the Curia’s acquiescence to the king’s ­petition to raise his friend, Remondo de Losana, to the archbishopric of Seville.5 Despite his overt manifestations of friendship and support for ­Alfonso, however, the pope was covertly inclined to confirm Richard of Cornwall, and even as he displayed every indication of his approval for the king of Castile, Alexander IV was simultaneously expressing his endorsement of Alfonso’s rival. One of the pontiff’s primary objectives at this time had been to secure peace between England and France, and Richard’s election and subsequent coronation at Aachen in May 1257 conjured up the image of a possible tripartite pact between France, Germany, and England to be forged under papal auspices.6 At the same time, the English monarch was in serious trouble with his barons due in great measure to the pope’s own intransigency in holding Henry III to the financial obligations incurred in securing Sicily for his younger son, Edmund. Richard of Cornwall had proven to be an important intermediary between his brother and the barons, and much of his authority lay in his claim to the throne of Germany, a fact that was not lost on Alexander IV.7 In spite of whatever goodwill Sancho may have managed to disseminate during his stay at the papal court, it soon became obvious that the English emissaries at Anagni during the spring of 1259 had clearly prevailed in their mission to incline the pontiff’s affections towards Richard. A letter from Alexander IV sent to the count of Burgundy with his ambassador, the Franciscan Walter de ­Rogate, requested the count to provide all possible assistance to ­Richard, whom he has determined to be the best candidate because of his strong support for the church.8 Even as Sancho was departing for Castile, the pontiff despatched another missive to Richard on 30 April 1259 overflowing with fulsome praise and his unconditional support for the earl’s forthcoming coronation. In fact, the pope informs him that he has already made the determination – duximus – to send Walter ­Rogate, his penitentiary and the earl’s staunch supporter, to Germany to announce his espousal of Richard’s cause.9

76

Dawn of a Dynasty

Unaware of this change in fortune, Alfonso X continued to p ­ ressure the pontiff for a decision. Finally, during the summer of 1259, ­Alexander, weary of the monarch’s incessant petitions, sent the papal legate ­Goffredo di Alatri to disabuse the king of any hopes he may have had for a rapid resolution of the problem concerning his coronation in Rome.10 This unexpected turn of events must have given the monarch pause to reflect, prompting him to convoke an assembly of nobles and advisors for a reassessment of the matter. Infante Manuel’s intervention in these discussions can be sustained until at least 1 July 1259, when we know from a document he confirms on this date that he was with the king in Toledo.11 However, on 10 July, he is conspicuously absent from the roster of signatories.12 In fact, his name is missing from chancery documents from that point on until 25 January 1260, indicating that he had left the royal court some time during July 1259. Until now, Alfonso X had been overly confident that his multiple embassies to Rome and the rest of Europe, backed by inordinate sums of money used variously to bribe or purchase political support for his cause, had been well received. He was, after all, competing with Richard of Cornwall, whose extraordinary affluence and remarkable profligacy were legendary. Alfonso’s activities in this regard had been sufficient to trigger an extremely negative reaction on the part of his father-in-law, Jaime I of Aragón, who on 23 September 1259 wrote concerning his apprehensions that Alfonso had embarked upon a course that seemed to him to indicate the Castilian was bent on subjecting the entire ­Peninsula to his political will.13 In spite of the 1256 peace treaty subscribed in Soria by Alfonso and his father-in-law, a pact sealed by the marriage of Infante Manuel and Jaime’s daughter Constanza, the king of Aragón had watched with increasing dismay as Alfonso intensified his drive for peninsular hegemony, slowly but relentlessly ­forging alliances first with England, then with France, Navarre, Pisa, and ­ ­Genova and now expanding his sphere of influence to include northern Italy and the papacy. Jaime’s response to this unremitting encroachment was to seek an agreement with Manfred of Sicily, the implacable adversary of both Alfonso and the church. Negotiations in this context had begun as early as 1258 and would eventually culminate in July 1260 with the betrothal of Jaime’s son and heir to the throne, Pedro, to Manfred’s daughter Constance, an event that provoked Alfonso to remark that Jaime, in this respect, had “done him a greater wrong than any man had ever received from another.”14 Alfonso X had met with his nobles and advisors sometime during the month of July, and they had counselled him to heed the pontiff’s advice against travelling personally to the Curia. Instead, they recommended



The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60

77

he despatch a delegation to be headed by his brother, Infante Manuel, for the purpose of ascertaining the current state and continuing viability of the imperial claims. These facts are contained in two important documents that Ballesteros knew of only indirectly, most likely because they were recorded by Böhmer in the Regesta Imperii, but it is clear he did not consult the texts themselves or he would have recognized that they constitute the initial written proof we have of Infante Manuel’s participation in the Castilian embassy to Italy.15 The first document is a letter sent by Alfonso to the citizens of Besançon on 18 October 1259,16 while the second is an undated papal brief from Alexander IV to Richard of Cornwall whose content clearly reveals it to have been issued during the first half of 1260, and most probably during the period immediately following Manuel’s departure from Anagni. Besançon was the seat of an archbishopric, an important centre of commerce, and a free imperial city situated in the Franch-Comté or County of Burgundy whose inhabitants were inclined to support ­Alfonso’s imperial aspirations, especially since the king had recently purchased the homage of Hugh IV, duke of Burgundy.17 The text of the document reveals both Alfonso’s supreme confidence in his ­candidacy and Infante Manuel’s growing stature at court. The king thanks the ­citizens of Besançon for their loyalty and support of his candidacy and asks that they forgive his delay in undertaking the journey to the ­empire as he had promised; states that on the advice of the prelates and lords who attended his recent cortes in Toledo, he is sending his illustrious brother Don Manuel and the venerable bishop of Segovia together with other noblemen to the Roman Curia to petition the pope to fix a date for his coronation; and declares that upon their return he will attend to the matter of a visit to Besançon.18 The second document to record Infante Manuel’s embassy is, as noted above, a papal bull issued by Alexander IV to Richard of ­Cornwall sometime in the first half of 1260, revealing that not only Infante ­Manuel and the bishop of Segovia but also Juan, archdeacon of Santiago, were among the many “dignitaries whom the illustrious King of Castile sent to the Holy See to request that we might summon him to the crown of the empire and that to this end we might set a specific date.”19 The pontiff’s guarded tone here is entirely at variance with his effulgent praise for Richard a year earlier. He has not yet been able to make a decision and asks that the earl have patience and heed the words of his nuncio, Master Albert, who will more fully explain his current position in the matter. Let us turn now to the other members of the royal delegation to ­Anagni during the fall of 1259. Ballesteros, with no supporting evidence,

78

Dawn of a Dynasty

states that Infante Manuel’s companions were “don ­ Remondo, su ­padrino, arzobispo de Sevilla, y Magister Juan, arcediano de Compostela y abad de Arvas.”20 In fact, Remondo de Losana was appointed archbishop of Seville by Alexander IV on 7 May 125921 and replaced in the bishopric of Segovia by the Dominican Fray Martín. Remondo confirms for the first time as “Arzobispo de Sevilla” in a royal charter dated 27 July, a document also confirmed by “D. Fr. Martín, Obispo de Segovia.”22 Fray Martín subsequently confirms as “Obispo de Segovia” on 2 ­October 1259 in a privilege granted by Alfonso X to the bishop and cathedral chapter of Cartagena in Toledo,23 a document despatched sixteen days before Alfonso’s letter to Besançon in which the king ­explicitly states that he was sending to the Roman Curia – ad Romanam Curiam mitteremus – “our dear brother Don Manuel and the venerable Bishop of Segovia” – Dominum Emmanuelem charissimum ­fratrem nostrum, & venerabilem Episcopum Segobiensem. Clearly, then, the prelate who ­accompanied Infante Manuel to Anagni during the fall of 1259 was not Remondo Losana but Fray Martín, bishop of Segovia. ­Ballesteros’s error in this regard was most likely elicited by the fact that the first recorded ­instance of Manuel’s embassy to Rome in the Regesta Imperii (V,2,3, n. 9140) is mistakenly ascribed by Böhmer to the year 1258: “­[Alexander IV] schreibt ... dass der könig von Castilien nach anderen vorhergegangenen botschaften nun seinen bruder Emanuel mit dem bischofe von Segovia und dem magister Johann, archidiacon von Compostella, an ihn gesandt habe.” Because Ballesteros at that point had no reason to dispute the date of the document, he accepted that the embassy had taken place in 1258, at which time Remondo de Losana was still bishop of Segovia. In fact, Fray Martín had been well known to Alfonso X since shortly after the conquest of Murcia, when the Aragonese forces of his father-in-law, Jaime I, began to advance south from Valencia while Alfonso was ­ ­ making incursions towards the north from Murcia. A  head-on c­ ollision between the two monarchs was avoided by the Treaty of Almizra, which expressly defined the boundaries between ­Valencia and Murcia. It was signed on 26 March 1244 and confirmed by, among others, “mestre Martí, ardiaca de València.”24 By 1251, the archdeacon had become “domini Alfonsi infantis Aragonum cancellarius,” the chancellor of ­Infante Alfonso of Aragón, Jaime I’s heir ­apparent, and a trusted ally of his cousins Alfonso and Manuel of ­Castile, whom he continued to support, often in defiance of his father, until his death in 1260.25 Fray Martín clearly had friends in high places. A document dated in Burgos, 11 July 1258, in which the cabildo or cathedral chapter of



The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60

79

­Valladolid repaid a debt of three hundred gold maravedís to the Florentine merchants Gualterio de Burgo and Tucio Benardi, is confirmed “in hospitio domini Andree de Ferentino, domini Pape ­consanguinei et Capellani, apostolice sedis Nuntii” and sealed by “frater Martinus ... de ordine predicatorum, quondam Archidiaconus Valentinus.”26 As we shall see later in this chapter, following Infante Manuel’s mission to the Curia, the papal nuncio and blood relative of ­Alexander IV Andreas de Ferentino was despatched to Alfonso X to counsel him concerning the pontiff’s change of heart in the matter of his former support for Richard of Cornwall. Fray Martín, then, was a Dominican whose close association with the papal legate immediately prior to his election as bishop of Segovia would indicate that his promotion to that post and subsequent appointment as Alfonso’s ambassador to Anagni were closely linked with his friendship to Andreas, the pope’s relative. On 14 March 1259, Fray Martín was a witness to the investiture of Hugh IV, duke of Burgundy, as a vassal of Alfonso X, confirming as “maestre Martín arcediano que fue de Valencia.”27 Four months later, on 8 July, the chapter of the Cathedral of Segovia declared they had chosen the Dominican Fray Martín, formerly “archidiaconus valentinus,” to ­replace Remondo de Losana as their bishop.28 It appears, however, that he was not ordained until 1262 when Alfonso X requested Archbishop Remondo to consecrate the bishops of Osma and Cuenca “con los obispos de Segovia y Albarracín.”29 In 1260, Fray Martín was charged by ­Alexander IV with preaching a crusade against the ­Muslims throughout the realm.30 That same year, the pope confirmed an agreement b ­ etween Fray Martín and the clergy of Cuéllar concerning a dispute that had arisen some years before during the episcopate of ­Remondo de Losana.31 Fray Martín was also an active participant in the cortes held in Seville during the winter of 1260–61 when Alfonso X was making arrangements for the conquest of Niebla.32 In 1262, U ­ rban IV requested the intervention of Fray Martín in the devolution of property unjustly removed from the monastery of Santa María de los Huertos.33 Two years later, Urban IV wrote to Fray Martín requesting him to deliver a certain sum of money to Maestro Sinicio that the church needed to confront Manfred of Sicily.34 On 30 June 1264, Urban IV again wrote to Fray Martín to inform him that he could designate subdeacon Don Gil as a canon.35 Fray Martín was most likely present during the assembly held in Seville during 1264 when Alfonso ordered the prelates of Segovia and Sigüenza to preach a crusade against the Muslims authorized by the two crusading bulls published by Innocent IV in 1246 and ­Alexander IV in 1259.36 He confirms as bishop of Segovia for the last time on 2 ­November 1264, and cathedral archives assert he died in 1265.37

80

Dawn of a Dynasty

Since he was replaced by the new bishop, Don Fernando Velázquez, brother of Archbishop Remondo de Losana, on 12 March 1265, we may infer that he died during the first few months of that year.38 In the context of the embassy to Anagni, we have a document confirmed by Fray Martín in Seville on 25 November 1259, indicating he had most likely been the first of the members of the delegation to leave the Curia, nearly a month before Manuel and the others returned to Spain sometime in December, perhaps for reasons of ill health.39 The third member of the delegation bound for Rome, Juan Alfonso, archdeacon of Santiago and abbot of Arvas, was a close friend and confidant of the king. Ballesteros refers to him variously as an “illegitimate son of Alfonso X,” “a nephew of the king,” “archdeacon of Trastámara in the Church of Santiago, the king’s notary, the pope’s [Urban IV] chaplain,” and “the uncle of Infante Sancho.”40 The first instance we have of Maestre Juan is found in a royal chancery document from July 1259 where he confirms as “Maestre Johan Alfonso, Notario del Rey en Leon e Arcediano de Santiago,” a title he holds until 28 April 1272.41 Prior to July 1259, the king’s notary in León was Suero Pérez, bishop of Zamora, who confirms as notary for the last time on 13 September 1258.42 Juan Alfonso’s promotion the following year was most probably related to his successful role as one of the king’s ambassadors to the pope, along with Infante Manuel and Fray Martín, bishop of Segovia. In December 1260, Juan figures prominently in the controversy between Archbishop Remondo of Seville and Infante Manuel’s brother, Archbishop Sancho of Toledo, who insisted on entering Seville for the forthcoming cortes with the raised cross of the Cathedral of Toledo, insinuating his superiority as primate of Spain over the see of Seville. The king, hoping to dissuade Sancho from his objective, sent Suero Pérez, bishop of Zamora, and Juan Alfonso, archdeacon of Santiago, to appease the proud young prelate.43 In 1261, Juan appears as arcediano and the king’s notary in an altercation between the church of Zamora and the Order of Alcántara.44 Two years later, the king named Juan Alfonso as one of his ambassadors to Urban IV when the pope declared he was ready to make a decision between Alfonso X and Richard of Cornwall.45 On 27 August 1263, Urban IV reconfirmed in a missive to Richard of Cornwall that Juan Alfonso was one of the Castilian king’s ambassadors but that he was also “capellanum nostrum,” our chaplain.46 The process was to take place in May 1264, and Alfonso X, determined to prevail, would despatch his most skilful emissaries.47 In August of that same year, Urban IV wrote to his chapelain “Magistro Johanni” and, again, to the archdeacon of Treviño in the Cathedral of Burgos detailing the many benefices Juan possessed, including the archdeaconry of



The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60

81

Trastámara, the archdeaconry of Carballedo in Astorga, the deanery of Lugo, and the secular abbacy of Arvas in Oviedo, among others.48 When Juan Arias, archbishop of Compostela, died on 4 May 1266, the cathedral chapter met to elect his successor, splitting into two factions: thirty-seven were in favour of Juan Alfonso, archdeacon of ­Trastámara, and twenty-eight were for Bernardo, canon of Tuy, archdeacon of ­Salnés, and the pope’s chaplain. The Curia, however, supported neither, and the following year Clement IV appointed Egas Fafez, bishop of Coimbra, to the post, but Egas died on 9 March 1269. In the meantime, the CAX refers to Juan Alfonso as “Archbishop elect of Santiago.”49 He confirms as archdeacon of Santiago and the king’s notary in León for the last time on 28 April 127250 and had died before 26 December 1272 when Gregory X, confirming Archbishop Gonzalo to the permanent position, remarks that Juan Alfonso had departed this life: “nature debitum persolvisset.”51 He was replaced several months later as notary in León by Maestre Fernando, bishop-elect of Oviedo.52 At this juncture, let us turn to the task of establishing a more specific date for Infante Manuel’s delegation to the Curia in Anagni. Both Otto and Ballesteros place the embassy at the end of 1259, while ­Lomax, who was unaware of the Besançon letter and Alexander IV’s despatch to Richard of Cornwall, believes the mission took place sometime in ­September 1260, or even much earlier.53 Though the precise date of ­Infante Manuel’s departure for Anagni is uncertain, the tenses ­employed in Alfonso’s Besançon letter indicate that he had been ­advised to send a delegation – vt ... mitteremus – and that when they return he proposes to be able to travel to the empire – & tunc in aduentu eorumdem proponimus partes Imperij Romani potenti, & virtuoso brachio visitare. The utilization of the present tense – proponimus – then, undoubtedly indicates that the embassy had already been despatched before the letter was written on 18 October 1259 and that the king is currently awaiting their return to assess the situation and take his next step. In an apparent contradiction of our itinerary established for Infante Manuel, we have a royal privilege issued to the bishop and cathedral chapter of Cartagena and confirmed by Manuel in Toledo on 2 October, though the same document published elsewhere does not contain his signature and therefore leads us to doubt his presence there at that time.54 In spite of Alfonso’s apparent nonchalance, there must have been some sense of the urgent nature of the Roman legation. From a document dated Westminster, 29 October, we know that Henry III had already approved a tallage to be levied in support of a trip to the Curia by his brother, Richard of Cornwall, who “in proximo profecturus est ad curiam romanam pro a­ rduis et ­urgentissimis negotiis, quae ad nostrum et suum

82

Dawn of a Dynasty

et regni nostri honorem et proficuum assumpsit.”55 Indeed, it seems at this point that Alfonso’s ambassadors might well have to confront the earl himself at the papal court in Anagni. Infante Manuel had probably left Toledo during July, most likely proceeding from there to Seville, a port city that would offer the shortest route to Italy.56 Because the 2 October charter issued in Toledo and mentioned earlier is confirmed by his travelling companion Fray Martín, bishop of Segovia, Infante Manuel must have set sail for the Curia sometime between 2 and 18 October when Alfonso wrote to the citizens of Besançon. Surely, given the multiple issues Alfonso needed to negotiate with the pope, the matter of his coronation could not have been the only subject Manuel was empowered to discuss. The monarch must have been aware of his father-in-law’s recent overtures to Manfred and the prospect of a marriage between his brother-in-law, Pedro, and M ­ anfred’s daughter, Constance, no doubt an issue of grave concern to the pontiff and a matter in which Manuel could profitably interject Alfonso’s own stringent opposition. Another topic of vital importance to the monarch was the planning and implementation of an African crusade, an objective that had been earlier discussed in the cortes of Toledo during the winter of 1258–59 and that had now become an essential part of Alfonso’s foreign policy.57 The church hierarchy throughout the kingdom had manifested its opposition to increased taxes to support new foreign ventures, and the pope would have to consider the problem of how to allow Alfonso to finance such a crusade with ecclesiastical revenues that had already been committed.58 Another affair of some concern to the king was the plight of his illegitimate daughter Beatrice, who had been wed in 1253 to ­Alfonso III, king of Portugal, even though he was still married to Matilda, countess of Boulogne, and was related to Beatrice within the prohibited degree of consanguinity. Beatrice represented the linchpin of Alfonso’s Portuguese policy, one that had recently been threatened by Pope Alexander’s excommunication of Alfonso III and the ensuing decree that his offspring, the Castilian king’s grandchildren, were therefore illegitimate.59 Perhaps Infante Manuel could persuade the pontiff to relent. Arriving at the papal Curia in Anagni during November 1259, I­ nfante Manuel and his fellow ambassadors found a vacillating and indecisive pope beset by a variety of intractable problems: his arch-­nemesis, ­Manfred, acting on a false rumour spread by the pope h ­ imself that ­Conradin had died in Germany, had subsequently had himself crowned king and was now the undisputed leader of the Ghibellines in Italy; the papacy had effectively lost control of Rome through Manfred’s alliance



The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60

83

with senators hostile to papal policies; the threat of an invasion by the Tartars loomed on the horizon; Alexander’s unswerving support for the Franciscans had created numerous enemies at home and abroad who were resentful of the friars’ influence at the Curia; and he was deeply enmeshed in the violent controversy provoked by William of St. Amour at the University of Paris.60 Earlier in the year, the pontiff had warmly embraced the candidacy of Richard of Cornwall. Would he now be amenable to the arguments proffered by Infante Manuel in support of his brother Alfonso X? Only two documents from the chancery of Alexander IV have so far been discovered that provide incontrovertible evidence of Manuel’s presence at the Curia. They consist of papal bulls issued on 10 and 12 April 1260. Both documents, unknown to Ballesteros, reveal several new facets of Manuel’s mission to Anagni. The text of the first charter, dated 10 April, provides documentary proof of Manuel’s presence at the Curia, stating that he personally – presentialiter supplicante – petitioned the pope to provide a dispensation to John of Heslerton allowing him to possess three benefices with cure of souls and personally testifying to those merits he possessed that would justify the appointment.61 Who was John of Heslerton, rector of St. Peter’s Church, Cockfield, in the diocese of Norwich, and what was his connection with Infante Manuel? Lomax was unable to identify him and suggested he might be either Manuel’s chaplain or a member of the Curia.62 In fact, the name “Cockfield” refers to Cockfield Manor and its church of St. Peter, Yoxford, Suffolk, in the diocese of Norwich. The advowson, or right to appoint the rector of Cockfield church, had been invested in the abbots of Bury St. Edmonds since their purchase of Cockfield Hall in 1242.63 John of Heslerton, also known as John of ­Cockfield with reference to his ecclesiastical post, was a powerful ­personage in his day, a royal justiciar for the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, one of King Henry III’s favourite clerks, and a friend of one of Henry’s most trusted subordinates, the treasurer of York and provost of Beverley, John Mansel. It was, though, his support of Prince Edward, Manuel’s brother-in-law, that provides us with the clue to the infante’s petition on his behalf. John’s immediate family appears to have been very much in control of their feudal domain. In 1226, Henry III commissioned Robert de Cocfeld, a knight of the shire, as sheriff of the county of York,64 and six years later as sheriff of the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk with broad powers over both ecclesiastical and secular persons.65 In 1246, during the war between Henry III and Alexander II of Scotland (1214–49), Adam de Cocfeud was entrusted with a mission to Ireland.66 In 1256, Pope Alexander IV gave papal dispensation to Master Roger de

84

Dawn of a Dynasty

Heslerton, clerk of the diocese of York, to hold one benefice with cure of souls besides those he already had in a document quite similar to the one providing John with the same exemption three years later.67 John himself was first appointed as itinerant justiciar for the county of Norfolk in 125768 and later that same year was named justice in eyre for the county of Suffolk.69 In 1258, John’s stature and influence within the royal administration are underscored by his assignment to deal with the king’s half-brother, William of Valentia, earl of Pembroke.70 The following year, John was empowered as royal justiciar to hear complaints against Richard de Clare, stepson of Richard of Cornwall by his first wife, Isabel Marshall, widow of Gilbert de Clare.71 Richard, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, had long been at odds with Infante Manuel’s brother-in-law, Prince Edward. Their altercation had become so critical to the affairs of state that it required a formal peace pact signed between the two in March 1259, an issue that may provide us with an answer to the question of how Infante Manuel came to petition the pope to grant John of Cockfield his additional benefices. John’s intervention in this particular litigation several months after the peace pact had been endorsed by both adversaries may well have been initiated by Prince Edward, who, pleased with the justiciar’s handling of the case, had requested his brother-in-law, Infante Manuel, to do what he could for John at the papal court.72 Not only had Prince Edward been well satisfied with John’s prosecution of the matter, King Henry himself was evidently pleased with John’s performance. In January 1260, he sent from Paris – where he had arrived in November 1259 to negotiate a peace treaty with Louis IX – a bolt of samite or rich silk fabric interwoven with gold, that he duly commands his tailor, Edward of Westminster, to make “sine dilacione” into a chasuble and cope for his “dilectum clericum,” John of Cockfield. These items are to be fashioned “with the appropriate finery of gold latticework with a brooch befitting such a cope so that the king may have them ready on his arrival in order that John may use them during the service when the king returns.”73 Two months later, the king wrote again from France to tell his tailor Edward to “fashion an alb of rich silk fabric and place on it those precious adornments which are part of an old alb at Westminster ... and to have it ready with the chasuble and cope of samite recently sent by the king for John of Cockfield, his cleric.”74 In July of that same year, King Henry wrote to John twice instructing him to refrain from instigating a suit against a cleric of the church of Berkhamsted.75 The castle of Berkhamsted was Richard of ­Cornwall’s primary residence, and one might infer from this injunction that



The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60

85

Richard had asked his brother to intervene in a matter directly related to his demesne. On 13 August 1260, the king instructed the seneschal of the royal forest of Essex to allow John Mansel, treasurer of York and provost of Beverley, and John of Cockfeud to hunt in the king’s woods, thus establishing the fact that the two were not only acquainted but hunting partners.76 Two years later, Mansel ceded to Henry de ­Cokefeld and his heirs “free warren in their demesne lands of Cokefeld and ­Brudefeld.”77 John Mansel was one of the king’s favorites and, as an active participant over the years in the quest to secure the crown of Sicily for H ­ enry’s youngest son, Edmund, had been a frequent visitor to the papal C ­ uria.78 This connection and those we have already seen raise the distinct possibility that John, a trusted friend of Mansel, may have actually been assigned to represent both the monarch’s and ­Richard’s interests at ­Anagni during the winter of 1259–60, in which case he would have come to know Infante Manuel personally. John’s role as royal justiciar of the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk is amply documented until 1282. Of some interest during this period is a reference in 1267 to John’s participation in a murder case in which the papal legate to England, Ottobuono, cardinal deacon of St. Adrian, personally intervened, establishing yet another connection between John, the Curia, and Infante Manuel:79 Ottobuono de Fieschi, elected Pope Adrian V in 1276, was a nephew of Innocent IV. In 1252, his s­ ister, Beatrice Fieschi, married Thomas II of Savoy whose niece, Eleanor of Provence, was the wife of Henry III. Thomas was also the uncle of ­Beatrice Contesson of Savoy, who would marry Infante Manuel in 1275. John continued as rector of the church of Cockfield during the early years of the reign of Edward I (1272–1307)80 and would appear to have died by 17 May 1282, when a record was published naming Richard of Heslerton as his heir.81 Babington, however, cites a document indicating his death occurred in 1283, a date with which Tanner concurs.82 We possess yet another papal document attesting to Infante Manuel’s visit to the Curia in the winter of 1259–60. Issued on 12 April 1260, it is addressed to the master and knights of the Order of Santiago, granting a petition presented by the Castilian prince. The pope affirms that in consideration of the Order’s piety and persuaded by Manuel’s pleas – consideratione religionis vestre ac prefati E., precibus inclinati – he will grant them in perpetuity the privilege of having a knight of S ­ antiago in ­attendance at the pope’s table.83 Infante Manuel had managed to procure for the Order of Santiago one of the most distinctive honours conferred by the pope, a permanent seat at the papal mensa. The occupant of the position, the commensalis, was in effect a prebendary of the papal familia who might also serve as

86

Dawn of a Dynasty

a cubicularius or chamberlain. During the course of the thirteenth century, papal chamberlains, who had formerly been chosen from among the sons of noble Roman families, were increasingly recruited from the monastic and chivalric orders. Among the elite at the Curia, they were recognized by a velvet sash hung from their saddle. They kept watch outside the pontiff’s chambers and accompanied him, one on either side, whenever he met with important dignitaries outside of the consistory.84 More importantly, the position within the pontificalis domus provided the Order of Santiago with direct access to the pope himself. Infante Manuel’s petition for and support of the Order of Santiago at this juncture was not merely a gesture of goodwill on his part but an integral component of his brother’s long-range plans to secure political hegemony in the kingdom of Murcia. Alfonso’s strategy in this regard was defined by a three-pronged approach: to repopulate the area with permanent Christian settlers, to strengthen and expand the influence of the bishopric of Cartagena, and to forge the closest possible ties with the Order of Santiago, whose members occupied crucial garrisons along the frontier between Murcia and Aragón.85 Undoubtedly, Alfonso had long since conceived of the dominant role Infante Manuel would eventually play in this emergent political scenario and had instructed his younger sibling to take advantage of every possible opportunity to integrate his fortunes with those of the Order of Santiago. Scarcely a year later, on 8 January 1261, Infante Manuel and his wife Constanza became “confreyres e familiares,” of the Order, an event we will explore more fully in the following chapter (Figs. 17, 18).86 While we may be sure that Infante Manuel’s embassy to Anagni had persuaded Pope Alexander IV to revise his assessment of the relative merits of the claims proffered by both parties, no details of the arguments in this regard are to be found in any of the extant documents from the apostolic chancery.87 The arguments tendered by Infante M ­ anuel and his fellow legates were sufficiently convincing to cause ­Alexander to suspend judgment, as he subsequently informed his quondam champion, Richard of Cornwall, in the spring of 1260: “nos in tam urgentis competicionis instancia tutum medium eligentes, responsum ad petita suspendimus.”88 Richard would soon learn the particulars from the ­papal envoy, Master Albert, while Alfonso would be duly informed by a special nuncio who is not named in the letter: “donec ad eundem regem nuncium specialem miserimus, per quem sibi curamus studio quo possumus pacis consilium suadere.”89 Neither Alexander IV (d. 25 May 1261) nor his successor, Urban IV (d. 2 October 1264) was willing or able to take a firm stance for or against the two candidates, yet in the meantime both continued to receive legations from the two opposing parties



The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60

87

who vigorously supported their respective claims. In the course of these ongoing deliberations, the third pope to become involved in the matter, Clement IV (1265–68), set a firm date for the presentation of arguments on both sides and called for the ambassadors of Richard and Alfonso to come before him on 7 January 1267 to state their case.90 It is only at this juncture, some seven years after his mission to Anagni, that we find a detailed account of Manuel’s embassy in a comprehensive and meticulously structured argument presented to Clement IV by Alfonso’s royal procurator, Magister Rodolfo di Poggibonsi.91 The significance of this document, both as a chronological synopsis of the monarch’s efforts to prevail over Richard of Cornwall from 1256 to 1267 and as a precise account of Infante Manuel’s intervention at the Curia in 1259–60, cannot be overstated. Rodolfo’s arguments had so effectively countered the statements set forth by Richard’s legation, headed by his son, Henry of Almain, that the pope felt constrained to set a new date, 26 March 1268, nearly a year later, for his own decision in the matter.92 Rodolfo’s declaration to the pope was discovered in the ­Miscellanea section of the Vatican archives and published by Adolf Fanta in 1885.93 Ballesteros was aware of Fanta’s research and Rodolfo’s presentation, mentioning it for the first time without any bibliographical references94 and later quoting a few words from Rodolfo’s arguments to support his claim that Manuel’s embassy was a success, but again without identifying his source.95 When he does provide an analysis of Rodolfo’s statements, he makes no mention whatsoever of the extensive passages referring to Infante Manuel, and in this context it is not surprising that Lomax was entirely unaware of either Fanta’s work or of Rodolfo’s detailed account of Manuel’s embassy.96 Proceeding to chronicle Alfonso’s efforts item by item, Rodolfo in due course refers to Infante Manuel’s embassy to Alexander IV in ­Anagni following many earlier legations to the Curia that had attempted to secure the same results without success, and notes the presence of both brothers – fratribus suis – Infante Manuel and Infante Sancho, at the papal court.97 In response to his petition, Alexander IV informed Infante Manuel that he would send a special apostolic nuncio to confer directly with Alfonso X and provide him with a precise accounting of every aspect of the matter. In effect, the papal nuncio would be Andreas de Ferentino, the same “blood relative of the pope, his chaplain and apostolic legate” who earlier in Burgos during July 1258 had co-signed a document with Fray Martín, the future bishop of Segovia who accompanied Infante Manuel on the journey to Anagni. Ferentino would personally assure the sovereign that it was never the pontiff’s intention to favour Richard of Cornwall nor act in any way that might be prejudicial

88

Dawn of a Dynasty

to the king of Castile. Furthermore, in response to Manuel’s enquiry concerning whether the pope had despatched either letters or papal nuncios to Germany to announce his support of Richard of Cornwall, the pontiff vehemently denied such allegations. In fact, Infante Manuel had been so persuasive that he was effectively able to move the pope to a position of neutrality in which the pontiff now abandoned his earlier espousal of Richard and the pledge he had made to send his emissary, Walter de Rogate, to Germany with the news of Alexander’s support. Infante Manuel’s embassy to the pope had been brief but beneficial. He had arrived sometime during November 1259 and was back in Castile early the following year, when he confirmed a royal privilege in Toledo on 25 January 1260.98 Whether due to his diplomatic ability or Alexander’s own fear of alienating a powerful Ghibelline ally, by the spring of 1260 the pope had clearly adopted a neutral stance with regard to the two candidates. Manuel had undoubtedly made a favourable impression at the Curia in Anagni. His ambassadorial role, like most of his involvement in the political affairs of Castile, had been characteristically unassuming and discreet yet highly effective. Lacking any previous experience in the complex arena of European politics, he had been entrusted with a delicate diplomatic mission to a court well known for intrigue, deception, and the interminable delays inherent in the complex protocols of its bureaucracy, and there he had prevailed, perhaps beyond Alfonso’s own expectations. The king was undoubtedly pleased with the outcome of Infante Manuel’s mission and would henceforth view his younger brother not merely as a faithful ally but now, with renewed conviction, as a valuable political asset.

SIGLO XII

TIERRA DE JORQUERA VALLE DE AYORA

CHINCHILLA

ALMANSA

VILLENA YECLA

HELLIN

SAX PETRER

ELDA MONÓVAR

NOVELDA

ASPE CREVILLENTE

ELCHE

SANTA POLA

MAR MEDITERRÁNEO

1.  “Tierra de Don Manuel.” In Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, El Señorío de Villena en el siglo XIV, 30. With permission of the authors.

2.  Toledo, February 1285. Miniature of Sancho IV appended to his testament. AHN, Sección Clero-Secular-Regular, Car. 3022, N.5 Bis. With permission of the Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte. Archivo Histórico Nacional.

3.  Tomb effigy of Sancho IV c.1500 by Diego Copín de Holanda. Catedral de Toledo. In Arco y Garay, Sepulcros de la Casa Real de Castilla, ix.

Juan de Aragón y Castilla (1330-1358)

Leonor de Guzmán (1310-1354)

Leonor (1367-1359)

Constanza (1290-1313)

=

Beatriz (1293-1359)

Maria de Portugal (1313-1357)

Ultimo rey de la Casa de Borgona

Pedro I de Castilla (1334-1369)

Alfonso XI de Castilla (1311-1350)

Fernando IV de Castilla (1285-1312)

Maria de Molina (1264-1321)

Pedro I de Portugal (1320-1367)

Alfonso IV de Portugal (1293-1357)

4.  Genealogical tree of Pedro I and Enrique II. Wikimedia Commons.

Primer rey de la Casa de Trastamara

Sancho Enrique II de Castilla Fadrique Fernando Tello Juan Juana Sancho Pedro Pedro (1336-1338) (1331-1343) (1333-1379) (1333-1358) (1336-1350) (1337-1370) (141-1359) (1247-?) (1343-1374) (1345-1359)

Fernando de Aragón y Castilla (1329-1263)

Alfonso IV de Aragón (1299-1336)

Pedro IV de Aragón (1319-1387)

Teresa de Entenza (?-1327)

Sancho IV de Castilla (1258-1295)

Isabel Dionisio I de Aragón de Portugal (1271-1336) (1261-1325)

Constanza II de Sicilia (1247-1302)

Alfonso III Blanca Jaime II de Aragón de Anjou de Aragón (1265-1291) (1280-1310) (1267-1327)

Pedro III de Aragón (1246-1285)

GENEAOLOGICAL TREE OF PEDRO I AND ENRIQUE II

Dukes of Swabia 1012-1268 drawn bt Muriel Gottrop~enwiki Ernest I of Babenburg 985-1012-ka.1015

Gisela, heiress of Swabia 990-1043 Adelaide of Susa 1015-1091

Hermann IV of Babenburg 1015-1030-1038

Ernest II of Babenburg 1010-1015-kb.1030

Counts of Sulzbach Henry I, the Black Holy Roman Emperor (Henry III) 1017-1038-1045-1056

Henry IV Holy Roman Emperor 1050-1056-1125

Otto II Palatine count of the Rhine r.1045-1048 1066

Henry V Holy Roman Emperor 1086-1056-1125

Rudolph von Reinfeld r.1057-1079

Bertha of Savoy 1051-1087

Agnes of Germany 1074-1143

Others

Conrad III King of Germany 1093-1138-1152

Others Agnes of Saarbrucken d. 1147

1135

Frederick II 1090-1105-1147

Judith of Bavaria 1100-1132

1121

Frederick I von Staufen (Hohenstaufen) 1050-1079-1105

1089

Gertrude of Sulzback d.1146

1136

Others Judith 1135-1191

1150

Ludwig II, Duke Conrad, Palatine Of Thuringia Count of the Rhein 1134-1195

Matthias I Duke of Lorraine

1138

1147-1153

Frederick V 1164-1167-1170

Frederick III Barbarossa HRE: 1155-1190 (Frederick I) 1122-1147-1190

Agnes 1180-1184

Henry II Duke of Brabant

1215

Otto IV of Bavaria KG:1208 HRE:1209-1215 1175-1208-1212-1218

Beatrice 1156-1181

Philip of Hohenstufen King of Germany:1198 1177-1196-k.1208

1212

Elizabeth 1203-1235

Beatrice 1198-1212

1209

1225

Henry d.1242

Margaret of Babenburg d.1267

Frederick d.1251 Elizabeth of Bavaria 1227-1273

1246

Ferdinand III King of Castile

1219

Albrecht, duke of saxony

Margaret 1237-1280

1225

Henry II of Hohenstaufen 1211-1216-1235-1242

Cunigunde 1200-1248

1224

Elizabeth, princess of England 1214-1241

3 boys died young

Frederick VII of Hohenstaufen KG:1212 HRE:1220-1250 (Frederick II) 1194-1212-1216-1250

Irene Angela Byzantine princess 1172-1208

Wenzel I, king of Bohemia

2 boys died young

Mary 1201-1235

William IV Count of Chalon

1197

1235

Constance Princess of Aragon 1179-1222

William VI, count of Montfort

Sophie Berengaria Queen of Castile

Constance of Hautevill Princess of Sicily 1154-1198

1186

Beatrice of Burgundy countess of Burgundy 1145-1184

1156

Otto II, count of Burgundy 1171-1190-k.1200

Conrad II Duke of Rothenburg 1173-1191-k.1196

Frederick VI 1167-1170-1191

Gertrude of Saxon 1155-1197

Bertha of Hohenstaufen 1123-1195

Adele of vohburg 1122-1190

Henry VI of Hohenstauffen Holy Roman Emperor 1165-1191-1197

Frederick IV 1145-1152-1167

Isabella II (Yolande) Queen of Jerusalem 1212-r.1212-1228

Conrad III of Hohenstaufen KG:1250 and king of Jerusalem 1228-1235-1254

Conrad IV (Conradin) King of Jerusalem 1252-1254 executed, 1268

5.  Genealogical tree of the Dukes of Swabia, 1012–1268. © Muriel Gottrop~enwiki. Wikipedia Commons.

6.  The parents of Infante Manuel, Fernando III and Beatrice of Swabia, on their wedding day, Burgos, 30 November 1219. North wing, upper cloister, Burgos Cathedral. Photo: © Dalv89. Wikipedia Commons.

7.  Statue of Infante Manuel, aged fourteen. Portada de Santa María, Burgos Cathedral. With permission of the Cabildo Metropolitano, Catedral de Burgos.

8.  Infante Manuel’s coat of arms described by his son, Juan Manuel, in the Libro de las armas, 1.122–7. Wikipedia Commons.

9.  Statue of Alfonso X, Portada de Santa María, Burgos Cathedral. With permission of the Cabildo Metropolitano, Catedral de Burgos. Head of Alfonso X, northwest corner of upper cloister, Burgos Cathedral. Photo: Jürg Hut, in Abegg, Die Skulpturen des 13. Jahrhunderts im Kreuzgang der Kathedrale von Burgos, no. 130. With permission of the author.

10.  Statues of infantes Fadrique, Fernando, and Enrique. Portada de Santa María, Burgos Cathedral. With permission of the Cabildo Metropolitano, Catedral de Burgos.

11.  Infanta Berenguela, Infante Felipe, Archbishop Sancho, and Infante Manuel. Southeast corner, upper cloister, Burgos Cathedral. © Ángel Ruiz. Compostela.blogspot.com/2016/01/el-claustro-alto-de-la-catedral-de.html. With permission of the author.

12.  Infanta Berenguela, Infante Manuel’s sister. Portada de Santa María, Burgos Cathedral. With permission of the Cabildo Metropolitano, Catedral de Burgos.

13.  Alfonso X, his wife Queen Violante, and two of their children in the Libro de ajedrez, dados y tablas, MS.T.1.6, fol. 54v. With permission of the Real Biblioteca de El Escorial.

14.  Queen Violante, wife of Alfonso X and Infante Manuel’s sister-in-law. East wing, cloister, Catedral de Burgos. Photo: © R. Abegg, in Die Skulpturen des 13. Jahrhunderts im Kreuzgang der Kathedrale von Burgos, no. 176. With permission of the author.

15.  Infante Manuel’s brother-in-law, Edward I of England. Sedilia, Westminster Abbey. Photo: © Dean and Chapter of Westminster. With permission of Westminster Abbey.

16.  Eleanor of Castile, Queen of England and Infante Manuel’s half-sister. Cast gilt bronze effigy on her tomb in Westminster Abbey by William Torel, 1291. Photo: © Dean and Chapter of Westminster. With permission of Westminster Abbey.

17.  Statue of Infante Manuel, wearing traditional leather cap and cape of knights of the Order of Santiago, upper cloister, Burgos Cathedral. © Ángel Ruiz. Compostela.blogspot.com/2016/01/el_claustro-alto-de-la-catedral-de. html. With permission of the author.

18.  Knights of the Order of Santa María or the Order of the Star, wearing caps and capes similar to those worn by Infante Manuel in the Burgos Cathedral upper cloister statue. Cantiga 78 (CSM 299), Florentine Codex, Ms. Banco Rari 20, fol. 100r. With permission of the Biblioteca Nazionale di Firenze.

19.  Monastery of Uclés in the province of Cuenca, site of Infante Manuel’s tomb. Photo: © Rocío Iarroci. Flickr.com. Wikimedia Commons.

20.  High altar of the monastery of Uclés, Cuenca, where Infante Manuel, his first wife Constanza de Aragón, and their son Alfonso Manuel are entombed. Photo: © Miguel A. Monjas. Wikimedia Commons.

21.  Wax and lead seals of Juan Manuel. In Amador de los Ríos, Historia de la Villa y Corte de Madrid (1.406).

22.  The Mudéjars of Murcia petition King Jaime I of Aragón to allow them to destroy a church dedicated to the Virgin Mary in the Arrixaca section of the city. Cantiga 169, Ms. T.I.1, fol. 226v. With permission of the Real Biblioteca de El Escorial.

23.  Tomb of Pope Gregory X, Duomo di Arezzo. Gregory died in the Palazzo Vescovile of Arezzo on 10 January 1276, a few months after his meeting with Alfonso X and Infante Manuel in Beaucaire. Photo: © Alessandro Falsetti. With permission of the Diocesi di Arezzo-Cortona-Sansepolcro.

24.  Eleventh-century castle of Beaucaire overlooking the Rhône River, the most likely venue for the meeting between Gregory X and Alfonso X during the summer of 1275. Wikipedia Commons.

25.  November 1275: Alfonso X with his sons Pedro, Juan, and Jaime, and Infante Manuel. Illustration of Cantiga 235 (Escorial Ms. B.I.2, fols. 212v–214r) in the Florentine codex, Ms. Banco Rari 20, fol. 92r. With permission of the Biblioteca Nazionale di Firenze.

THE HOUSE OF SAVOY Count Amadeus I of Geneva (1100-1170) m. Matilda de Cuiseaux (d. before 1137)

Count Amadeus of Savoy (1088-1148) m. Matilda of Viennois (d. after 1145) Count Humbert III of Savoy (1136-1188) 1) Clemence of Zabringen (1164) 2) Beatrice de Vienne (1175)

William I of Geneva (1130-1195) m. Beatrice of Faucigny (c. 1145- )

COUNT THOMAS OF SAVOY (c.1178-1233)

Marguerite of Geneva (c.1179-1257)

Beatrice (d.after 1180) m. Ebal. lord of Grandson (1158-1233)

Countesson of Geneva (d. after 1188) m. Henri, lord of Faucigny (c.1150-1197) Aymon II, lord of Faucigny (C.1180-1253) m. Beatrice of Burgundy (1190-1261)

Agnes de Faucigny

AMADEUS IV Humbert Aymon William Beatrice m. Peter II (1197-1255) (d. 1225) (d.1257) bishop of (c.1205-1265) (c. 1205 m. Raymond 1268) Valence 1) Marguerite d’Albon (D. 1239) Berengar V In 1234 (1192-1242) in 1225 THOMAS of Provence 2) Cecile des Baux (1190-1250) (1197-1249) (c.1230-1275) in 1244 In 1219 1) Jeanne de Constantinople 2) Beatrice dei Fieschi

(2)

(2)

(1)

(1)

BONIFACE Marguerite Beatrice Beatrice (1224-1259) Contesson (c.1248-1263) (1215-1254) m. Boniface II 1) Manfred of Saluzzo (c.1250-1290) of Monferrato (1215-1244) 1) Pierre de (1202-1253) Chalon in 1268 2) Manfred (c.1243-1272) Hohenstaufen William VII 2) Infante Manuel (c.1232-1266) in 1248 Of Monderrato (1234-1283) in 1275 (1240-1292) 1) Isabel de Calre Juan Manuel (1240-c.1271) (1282-1348) 2) Beatriz de Casalla (1254-c.1280) in 1271

Boniface PHILIPPE I Marguerite (d. 1273) archbishop (1207-1285) m. Hartmans of m. Alix of Merano of Kyburg Canterbury (d. 1270) In 1267 (d.1264) In 1218 Widow of Hugh of Chalon (c. 1220-1266)

Beatrice, dauphine of Viennois (D.1310) 1) Guigues VII (d.1270) 2) Gastón de Bearn (1221-1290) in 1273 Jean I

Offspring of Alix’s First Marriage

Anne

Otto IV Renaud Guia Hugh Polie Elizabeth Count of Chalon

26.  Genealogical table of the House of Savoy. © Richard P. Kinkade.

27.  Facial reconstruction of Pedro III of Aragón based on his remains. Centro de Restauración de Bienes Muebles de Cataluña in Valldoreix, Sant Cugat del Valls and the Museu d’Història de Catalunya. Photo: © Visualforensic. Philippe Froesch. With permission of the Museu d’Història de Catalunya.

28.  Barcelona, 7 October 1278: Pedro III writes to Infante Manuel concerning acts of robbery committed on the border of Valencia. ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 84. With permission of the Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte. Archivo de la Corona de Aragón.

29.  Siege of Balaguer, 7 July 1280: Pedro III writes to Infante Manuel excusing the conduct of his men, who did not give the infante a proper reception when he crossed the border into Valencia. ACA Reg. 47, fol. 96v. With permission of the Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte. Archivo de la Corona de Aragón.

30.  Alzira, 19 October 1280: Pedro III writes to Infante Manuel concerning certain unlawful acts committed by Conrado Lancia in Biar. ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 98v. With permission of the Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte. Archivo de la Corona de Aragón.

31.  Burgos, 5 March 1281: Infante Manuel writes to the town council of Burgos requesting them to exempt from municipal taxes those houses belonging to Urraca and Marina García, the daughters of his nursemaid, Doña Toda. AM Burgos, Ms. HI-2691. With permission of the Ayuntamiento de Burgos. Archivo Municipal de Burgos.

32.  Campillo, 27 March 1281: Alfonso X cedes to Pedro III the castle and village of Ayora belonging to Infante Manuel, promising to give his brother Escalona in return. ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 103r. With permission of the Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte. Archivo de la Corona de Aragón.

33.  Campillo, 27 March 1281: Alfonso X gives the castle of Escalona to Infante Manuel in exchange for castles in the “Tierra de Don Manuel” ceded to Pedro III. Photo: © Jim Anzalone. Wikipedia Commons.

34.  Campillo, 27 March 1281: Infante Manuel promises Pedro III to hand over the castles and towns of Ayora and Villa de Palavidos. ACA, Pedro III, Registro 47, f. 107r. With permission of the Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte. Archivo de la Corona de Aragón.

35.  Burgos, 5 April 1283: Infante Sancho transfers ownership of Peñafiel to Infante Manuel. AHN Clero-Secular-Regular, Car. 3435, N.1, fol. 5r–v. With permission of the Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte. Archivo Histórico Nacional.

4 Dominion in Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

Infante Manuel had returned to Castile from Anagni by the beginning of January 1260 and was in Toledo on the twenty-fifth of that month. where he confirmed a royal document that makes a specific reference to Alfonso’s proximate naval invasion of Salé, a port on the ­Atlantic coast of Morocco.1 Prior to undertaking the expedition, however, ­Alfonso needed to be assured of the support of his father-in-law, Jaime I of Aragón, and to that end had arranged a meeting between the two monarchs in Ágreda during March and April. Unlike their fractious ­encounter in Soria four years earlier, when the marriage of ­Manuel and Constanza had been proposed as a means to achieve some ­degree of harmony between the two royal adversaries, the assembly in Ágreda found both sovereigns on friendly terms. The extensive list of signatories to the various documents generated during the conference suggests that Alfonso was accompanied by his entire court. Certainly, Queen ­Violante and Constanza would have taken the opportunity to meet with their father, and on this occasion Alfonso X found himself surrounded by his brothers – Manuel, Sancho, Fadrique, and Felipe –, with the notable exception of the renegade Enrique, who had recently joined forces with the emir of Tunis.2 By 12 April, the royal cortege on its way back to Toledo passed through Soria, where the king issued a privilege to the city council of Burgos confirmed by Infante Manuel, his brothers, and Fray Martín, who had accompanied Manuel to Anagni.3 The court had returned to Toledo by 27 April, and two days later the monarch was in Uclés, seat of the Order of Santiago. If Manuel continued to accompany his brother on this trip, it seems likely that he would have taken advantage of the interval to meet there with the knights of the Order to which he and Constanza would pledge their allegiance as confreres eight months later. Alfonso X, Manuel, and accompanying members of the

90

Dawn of a Dynasty

court had arrived in Seville by the end of June, and the infante confirms a ­charter there on 27 July.4 In fact, most of the documents in which ­Manuel appears up to August 1265 are dated in Seville, indicating that this five-year period would be spent primarily in the enlargement and consolidation of his holdings in Andalusia. Manuel had been entrusted with the alferecía of the realm on 13 ­September 1258, and his privileged status at court as the monarch’s brother and most trusted advisor was indisputable. When we consider that the rank and title he now held implied leadership of the army, we might be tempted to dismiss his responsibilities in this category as largely ceremonial, but that would effectively deny the facts as we now know them. Infante Manuel was twenty-six years old, a veteran soldier who had participated in several armed conflicts and had also proven himself a competent diplomat at the Curia in Anagni. His older ­brothers, Fadrique and Enrique, better known than he for their martial skills and leadership, were currently in disfavour with Alfonso. Enrique had been effectively expelled from the country five years earlier following his rebellion, and Fadrique, disillusioned with Alfonso’s grand schemes, which always seemed to exclude him, would soon leave his brother’s court to join Enrique in service to Mohammed I al-Mustansir, the Hafsid ruler of Tunis.5 The vacillating Infante Felipe had resigned his post as archbishop-elect of Seville to marry Christina of Norway a year earlier, and Infante Sancho was firmly entrenched in the office of primate-elect of the see of Toledo, leaving Alfonso with only one brother, his favourite, to act as his surrogate in the management of the affairs of the realm. In this context, Infante Manuel apparently had no interests apart from his love of hunting and service to the monarch. Given his youth and the obvious comparisons that would have been drawn at court between him and his older brothers, however, Manuel must have realized that as the king’s alférez he would need additional support, and this he would soon discover in the person of Pelay Pérez de Correa, master of the Order of Santiago (1243–75), who was, at the time, the most powerful military figure in Castile.6 Formerly comendador mayor (1241–42) of Uclés, seat of the Order of Santiago, Pelay Pérez became its grand master on 15 February 1243.7 He had been one of Infante Alfonso’s most intrepid supporters during the conquest of Murcia that same year, and his subsequent exploits during the siege of Seville are recounted at length in both the Estoria de España8 and Juan Manuel’s Crónica abreviada.9 So great was the m ­ aestre’s prestige and influence with the young Alfonso, not to mention his considerable diplomatic talents, that he was entrusted with the delicate negotiations that would lead to the betrothal of the infante with Jaime



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

91

I’s daughter, Violante.10 Infante Alfonso even went so far as to promise Pelay Pérez that he would entrust the upbringing of his first son to the master and the Order of Santiago.11 With Alfonso’s ascension to the throne in 1252, his loyal retainer was amply rewarded in the partition of Seville, where he took up residence in a sumptuous dwelling in the parish of San Lorenzo.12 His constant presence and indisputable authority at court are attested by the large number of royal chancery documents he confirms until around 1272, when his imprudent support for the rebellion of Infante Felipe and the nobles precipitated a falling out with the monarch and a dramatic decline in the maestre’s fortunes. In the meantime, however, his star was in the ascendant, and Infante Manuel, the king’s alférez, must have relied upon his wisdom and experience while Alfonso X prepared to launch a naval attack on Salé. Though we have no record of his intervention in the matter, the grand master had to have been intimately involved in the enterprise, since Salé had been granted to the Order of Santiago by Innocent IV in 1245.13 Furthermore, Pelay Pérez had previously signed a contract with Alfonso to provide in perpetuity a galley equipped with two hundred armed men for three months each year, and the nature of the attack on the seaport of Salé seems to imply that this particular man-of-war would have been utilized in the endeavour.14 Given the inviting prospect of extending the domains of his Order to the shores of Africa, and the considerable booty to be derived from such a venture, Pelay Pérez Correa would also have been one of the most ardent sponsors of the Salé campaign, and no doubt his zeal would have been transmitted to Alfonso’s alférez, Infante Manuel.15 The expedition, carried out in the month of September 1260, was only partially successful. While the Castilians managed to plunder the city and return to Seville with nearly three thousand captives, they were unable to secure a permanent foothold on the African mainland.16 Manuel, whose name is missing from chancery documents after 27 July, is present once again at court in Seville on 21 November,17 an absence corresponding precisely to the period Ballesteros has calculated for the campaign preparations in August, the invasion and occupation of Salé during 2–25 September, and the return of the fleet to Seville on 2 November.18 Can his absence at court during these three months be attributed to his participation in the sack of Salé? The circumstances appear to support this speculation. The 21 November document is significant in that Manuel’s close friend, Alfonso Garcia, confirms as adelantado mayor de tierra de Murcia, where tierra de Murcia appears in his title for first time, indicating a certain change of administrative duties. It is also the first document we have in which Manuel’s nephew, ­Fernando de la Cerda, confirms as his father’s mayordomo.19 A day later,

92

Dawn of a Dynasty

the same signatories confirm another royal privilege.20 In December, together with his brothers the infantes Felipe and Luis, Manuel witnessed a document in which his older brother Sancho, archbishop of Toledo, promised not to enter Seville with his cross raised on high, a symbolic act signalling, as mentioned above, the superiority of the see of Toledo over Don Remondo, archbishop of Seville, who had strenuously opposed this offensive display of power.21 Manuel and Constanza inaugurated the new year by becoming confreres of the Order of Santiago on 8 January 1261 during the cortes convoked in Seville by the king. The extant contract, which both endorse, specifically refers to their abiding love for the Order and their great and lasting friendship with Pelay Pérez: “por onra de la Orden de ­Cavallería de Sant Yago e por grand devoción e grand amor que avemos en ella, e sennaladamiente por onra e por amiztad que avemos con el maestre Don Pelay Pérez.”22 The text of the document, often mentioned but little analysed, contains several significant items which we must consider.23 The promise of Manuel and Constanza to endow the Order with the immense sum of twenty-five thousand maravedís is striking, and far out of proportion to other donations given to the Order during the years for which we possess documentary evidence.24 Two thousand maravedís were to be given at once to fund the construction of a chapel at the Monastery of Uclés where the couple would eventually be interred, and the rest would be forthcoming from their estate at the time of their death (Fig. 19). What did they receive in return for such a munificent gift to the Order? In addition to the chapel and four chaplains who would celebrate Mass for the couple and their descendants till the end of time, Pelay Pérez and the Order promise to cede to Manuel and Constanza certain valuable properties to be held by them during their lifetime. Herein lies the clue to Manuel’s exorbitant bequest of twenty-five thousand maravedís: the castle, town, and villages of Haro (modern-day Villaescusa de Haro), halfway between the castles of Belmonte and Garcimuñoz and formerly the stronghold of Diego López III de Haro, Alfonso’s alférez. Diego López forfeited many of his possessions when he rebelled against the monarch in 1254, allying himself with Jaime I of Aragón. Certainly the fortress of Haro, on the border between Castile and Aragón, was considered critical to Castilian defences during the subsequent conflict between Alfonso X and his father-in-law, and was in all likelihood given to the Order of Santiago as a strategic measure following the death of Diego López in October 1254.25 The cannadas, small streams or irrigation canals of Alarcón and Mora, were areas between the Záncara and Júcar rivers where there was sufficient running water



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

93

during part of the year to operate molinos or water mills. La Presa, as its name suggests, was an artificial lake created to power a water mill, as Juan Manuel infers in his Libro de la caza,26 and can probably be identified with Torre de la Presa some forty kilometres to the east of Haro.27 Manuel’s willingness to invest so much capital in Haro suggests that the castle of Haro had become one of his principal residences in Cuenca during the decade of the 1260s. When Infante Manuel died in December 1283, he stipulated in his will that the monastery of Uclés be gifted not twenty-three thousand but fifty thousand maravedís, of which twenty thousand were to be utilized for the construction of a main chapel or chancel where he and his wife Constanza were to be interred, and ten thousand maravedís were designated for the purchase of a hereditary property within the boundaries of Uclés, with the income to be used to pay for six chaplains to say mass for their souls and those of their descendants forever (Fig. 20). The remaining twenty thousand maravedís were to be expended for another hereditary property for the Order from which its members would derive an annuity for their support.28 Infante Manuel’s agreement with the Order of Santiago also provides evidence that he and Constanza had had no children since their marriage in 1256, offspring who would otherwise have been mentioned by name in the contract. Therefore, their two children, Alfonso and ­Violante Manuel, must have been born sometime between 8 January 1261 and their mother’s death in the spring of 1266. Alfonso most likely came into this world in Seville soon after the agreement was signed in 1261, since he was old enough at his death in August 1275 to be addressed as a “nobilis vir” by the chronicler Jofré de Loaysa, indicating that he had attained his majority and was at least fourteen when he died.29 In fact, his half-brother, Juan Manuel, reports in the Libro de las armas that Alfonso was old enough to have knighted a number of worthies, including García Fernández Manrique.30 Violante was probably born in 1265 and at her father’s death in 1283 inherited Elda and Novelda. In 1287, she married Infante Alfonso of Portugal, younger brother of King Dinis.31 She was said to have been murdered by her husband, and her death in 1306 is recorded in several letters exchanged between Jaime II of Aragón, Juan Manuel and King Dinis.32 Manuel and Constanza were in Seville until the end of June 1261, during which time the infante confirmed six chancery documents as the king’s brother and alférez.33 Alfonso X had convoked the cortes during the early part of the year, and Manuel’s attendance, along with that of his brothers, would have been essential as the monarch’s counsellor and confident, a fact verified by the sovereign himself: “Et auido nuestro acuerdo et nostro conseio con Don Sancho, nostro ermano,

94

Dawn of a Dynasty

Arçobispo de Toledo, et con el infante Don Felipe, et el inffante Don Manuel et el inffante Don Loys, nuestros ermanos.”34 By midyear, however, we encounter a gap of nearly nine months between 28 June 1261 and 24  March 1262 when Infante Manuel’s name cannot be found in court documents. Once again, his unexplained absence corresponds perfectly with the dates of the siege of Niebla, which began sometime during July 1261 and ended with the capitulation of Ibn Mahfuz and the citadel in late February 1262.35 It was also during this particular juncture that Alfonso was actively acquiring and redistributing the former domains of Jeanne de Ponthieu and his brother Fadrique, and it seems reasonable to assume that many of these possessions were subsequently bequeathed to the king’s alférez, Infante Manuel, whose ­performance at the papal Curia in Anagni a year earlier had exceeded all expectations. Suddenly, and apparently without warning, Infante Manuel’s brother Archbishop Sancho died, with no textual evidence yet discovered to ­explain his untimely demise. Rivera Recio reports that “Muy joven falleció el arzobispo Don Sancho, el 27 de octubre de 1261, a los treinta y dos años de edad, después de haber sido ocho años procurador de la diócesis de Toledo y dos arzobispo de ella.”36 He had been in Seville as ­recently as 23 June, when he confirmed a royal privilege, though the final document we have from his hand is dated 5 October in San T ­ orcaz near Alcalá de Henares.37 Circumstantial evidence may lead us to a probable explanation. Given the proximity of Niebla to Seville and Alfonso’s documented presence there during the siege, it is not difficult to imagine that many members of the royal court would have taken ­advantage of the relatively brief journey of about seventy-five k ­ ilometres to personally witness the prolonged event. At the same time, the Crónica de ­Alfonso X reports that “en aquella çerca veno en las gentes de los reales de los christianos tan gran tempestad de moscas que ninguno de los de la hueste non podían comer ninguna cosa que luego non comiesen moscas, et con esto avían menasión et desta dolençia morían muchos omnes” (6.16). The dolençia or illness to which the CAX refers, menasión, was diarrhea, or, in this case, most certainly a deadly cholera epidemic.38 Did Sancho venture forth to observe the siege and fall victim to cholera? His death occurred in October towards the end of the summer and very possibly during the epidemic caused by a plague of flies. This untoward event must have been devastating for Alfonso X, who, in addition to the earlier defection of his brothers Fadrique and Enrique, now found himself bereft of his chancellor and one of his most trusted family members. On the other hand, this episode could only have had beneficial consequences for Infante Manuel, who now, more



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

95

than ever, would replace his older brothers as the king’s closest confidant. As the year 1261 came to an end, Infante Manuel was actively involved in the siege of Niebla as the king’s alférez and would not return to the court in Seville until the blockade ended sometime in February 1262. On 22 March of the new year, he confirms a royal privilege issued by Alfonso X to the town of Madrid conferring upon it the laws of the Fuero Real.39 Two days later Manuel was a signatory to the king’s charter guaranteeing the citizens of Seville freedom from any requirement to house or quarter members of the royal family or other nobles who might demand it without first having to obtain consent and to pay for such services.40 On 25 March, he confirms a royal privilege to the abbot and clergy of San Esteban de Gormaz,41 and on 15 April he endorsed another royal charter to the colonists of Almansa, a town that would in time belong to him, granting them the laws and franchises of Requena.42 On 25 April 1262, Ballesteros claims, Alfonso appointed Manuel ­adelantado mayor de Murcia, citing as his source Francisco Cascales, ­Discursos históricos de Murcia.43 Cascales states that following the conquest of Murcia in 1243, Fernando III gave the city to “Don Alonso el Sabio, el qual dexó por adelantado a su hermano el infant Don ­Manuel, i él por su teniente a Dia Sanchez de Bustamante. De manera que el infant Don Manuel ... fue el primer adelantado mayor deste ­reino de ­Murcia, después de la restauración. Assi lo dize Montaner en su crónica, i consta de una cedula del dicho rei Don Alonso, dada en ­Sevilla a 25 de Abril, año 1262” (286). Muntaner’s Crónica, though, does not publish the charter of 25 April and instead remarks that Manuel was appointed adelantado mayor de Murcia not in 1262 but in 1266, after the city was reconquered by Jaime I and turned over to Alfonso X following the Mudéjar uprising of 1264: He turned it all over to his son-in-law the king of Castile, both his part and the other, in order that together they might help each other. And in particular he turned over to his son-in-law Don Manuel Elche, the Valley of Elda and Novelda, Aspe and Petrer. And the king of Castile, Don Alfonso, likewise made Infante Don Manuel adelantado of all of his part. And in this way all the lands aided each other and defended each other against the Moors, each one with the other.44

Furthermore, in the Discursos, Cascales had earlier claimed that Infante Manuel was given Murcia for the first time soon after Alfonso X received the city from his father Fernando III, around 1244–46: “Como era fuerça al infant Don Alonso acudir a menudo a Castella, i Andaluzia, nombró

96

Dawn of a Dynasty

por su adelantado mayor, i administrador deste reino a su hermano el infant Don Manuel, i él por su teniente a Diag Sanchez de Bustamante, i diole por juro de heredad las villas, i castillos de Elche, Crevillen, Aspe, i el valle de Elda” (25). Elsewhere in the Discursos, Cascales claims that Infante Manuel received Murcia from Alfonso for the second time after the city was taken by Jaime I on 13 February 1265: “Vino el rei Don Alonso a Murcia donde fue recibido alegremente; entregó segunda vez el alcaçar al infante Don Manuel; hízole adelantado del reino” (33). In this particular instance, however, there can be no doubt that Cascales was merely echoing the CAX, which recounts that “El rey Don Alfonso fue a la çibdat de Murçia et este Alboaquez e los moros que estauan en ella entregaron gela, e dexó en el alcáçar al infante Don Manuel su hermano” (15.43). Finally, Cascales provides the following erroneous chronological catalogue of the adelantados del reino de Murcia: “Infante Don Manuel ... fue el primer adelantado mayor deste reino de Murcia ... i él por su teniente a Dia Sánchez de Bustamante; Garci Suárez, adelantado mayor, ... año 1264; Don Alonso García de Villamayor, adelantado mayor ... año 1266; Don Enrique Pérez de Harana, adelantado mayor ... año 1272; Don García Iufre de Loaysa, adelantado mayor ... año 1285” (286). There are, however, several glaring inaccuracies in the Cascales account that Ballesteros overlooked. First, Cascales believed that Alfonso initially gave Murcia to Infante Manuel sometime between 1244 and 1246 when Manuel, born in 1234, was only ten to twelve years old. Second, he asserts that Infante M ­ anuel then entrusted the adelantamiento to his lieutenant, Diego Sánchez de Bustamante, who did not exercise the office of adelantado mayor de Murcia until at least 1 March 1280, some thirty-five years later.45 Third, C ­ ascales ignored Mutaner’s account in the Crónica that states that ­Manuel received Elche, Crevillen, Aspe, and Elda in 1266, not 1246. Fourth, the dates C ­ ascales has provided for the succession of adelantados mayores de Murcia are based on the few documents he had at his disposal at that time and in no way reflect the true sequence of events. Amid this confusion, let us try to extract a more consistent exposition of the facts surrounding the office and the officeholders of the adelantado mayor de Murcia. The first notice we have of a Castilian official governing in Murcia other than Alfonso X himself, whether in his capacity as infante or king, is “Garci Suares, Merino mayor del Reyno de Murcia,” who initially confirms on 5 March 1254.46 During an inspection of the kingdom of Murcia in 1257, however, the king decided to implement a political and administrative reorganization of the government that would substitute the largely managerial office of merino for an adelantado mayor that, while maintaining the administrative duties of the merino, would



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

97

enhance the position with increased political and military responsibilities.47 Under this new regime the former merino mayor, García Suarez, was replaced on 13 September 1258 by Alfonso García de Villamayor, “adelantado mayor del regno de Murçia.”48 Alfonso García confirms in that post until June 1272, when he was r­eplaced as adelantado de Murcia by Enrique Pérez de Harana, ­“Repostero mayor del Rey e Adelantado en el regno de Murçia por el Infante D. Ferrando.”49 However, as late as 28 April 1272, there seems to be some vacillation with regard to the position when the king, in a privilege to the Christian inhabitants of Murcia, makes reference to “nuestro ­Adelantado, o daquel que estubiere y en su logar, que cumpla quanto nos mandaremos,” indicating that on that date neither Alfonso García, Infante Manuel, nor Enrique Pérez held the office.50 Pérez confirms in this position for the last time on 3 August 1274,51 though Torres Fontes believes he continued to serve in this capacity until the death of ­Infante Fernando in July 1275.52 After this date, we have no documentary ­evidence referring to the adelantado de Murcia until 1 March 1280, when Alfonso issued an order to the councils of the bishopric of Cartagena in which he decrees: “Et non fagades ende al, si non mando a Dia Sánchez de Bustamante, adelantado maior en el regno de Murcia por el infante Don Manuel, mio hermano, et a otro qualquier que este y por el.”53 Diego Sánchez continues to act as adelantado de Murcia for Infante Manuel at least until 27 May 1281 when the king, in a letter to the town council of Orihuela, states at the end of the document: “Et mando a Diag Sanchez de Bustamante o a qualquier que fuese adelantado por el infante Don Manuel, mio hermano, en el reyno de Murçia, que lo fagan assi cumplir como yo mando, e non fagan ende al.”54 Several months later, on 9 August 1281, Infante Manuel writes to the adelantado and ­almojarife of Murcia, whom he does not identify, enjoining them to respect the rights and privileges of Elche, so that it is evident he himself was no longer acting as the adelantado.55 On 28 November of that same year, the king of Aragón, Pedro III, wrote to “Sancio Eneguez adelanto Infantis Dompni Emanuelis” proposing the election of three individuals who would establish the municipal boundaries between Ayora and Almansa in the kingdom of Murcia. A week later, the ­Aragonese addressed the same individual concerning a Mudéjar citizen of ­Cocentaina who had been detained by officials of Infante Manuel in the seaport of Santa Pola.56 All the evidence we possess, then, points to the fact that Infante ­Manuel never formally held the title of adelantado mayor de Murcia ­until after the death of Infante Fernando de la Cerda in July 1275, and even then the responsibilities of that office were largely handled by his

98

Dawn of a Dynasty

surrogate, Diego Sánchez de Bustamente, who acted in his stead until 1281, and in November and December of that same year by Manuel’s adelantado, Sancho Íñiguez. Ballesteros’s claim that Manuel was appointed adelantado mayor de Murcia in 1262 was originally based on an erroneous reading of Muntaner’s Crónica by Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, and unwittingly perpetuated until now by Torres Fontes, Lomax, and other leading contemporary historians.57 For nearly five months between 15 April and 11 September 1262, Infante Manuel is absent from chancery documents issued by his brother in Seville. It is very possible he was occupied with royal affairs in the kingdom of Murcia, and perhaps the 15 April privilege giving Almansa the fuero of Requena is suggestive of his activity in the region along the Castilian-Aragonese border during the spring and summer of that year. Upon Manuel’s return to Seville in September 1262, his brother once again refers fondly to his fundamental position as the monarch’s close friend and confident: “E avido nuestro concejo con el infante D. Manuel, e con D. Luis, nuestros hermanos, e con los perlados, e con los ricos omes, e con los otros sabidores de derecho, que eran en nuestra corte.”58 From 11 September 1262 to 27 October 1264, over a period of twenty-five months, we again hear nothing whatsoever about Infante Manuel, and his name is entirely missing from extant chancery documents. In reality, very few if any of the royal chancery decrees from 1263 are confirmed by the usual extensive list of dignitaries, so that Infante Manuel’s absence is not exceptional. During this interval, however, we must perforce resort to circumstantial evidence to ascertain the role he would play in the crucial months ahead. On 20 April 1263, Pelay Pérez Correa, master of the Order of Santiago, was commissioned by Alfonso X to head a delegation to the Portuguese court of Alfonso III in order to resolve the jurisdictional matters that had been long simmering in the Algarve. Among the four procurators chosen to accompany him was Alfonso García, adelantado mayor de Murcia.59 This appointment would have effectively left Murcia without a military governor for at least two or three months, and we may suppose that during this hiatus Infante Manuel may have assumed responsibility for the active administration of the territory. In any case, of the year 1263, Ballesteros remarks “fue pacífico y dedicado a la jurisprudencia y las letras,”60 a tranquil interlude that would stand in stark contrast with the impending insurrection of the Mudéjars in Andalusia and the catastrophic events of 1264. For many years, since the capitulation of Murcia in 1243, Alfonso had pursued a policy of pacification of the Mudéjar inhabitants and restoration of the indigenous economy throughout the region, primarily by hewing closely to the provisions of the Treaty of Alcaraz in which



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

99

the King of Murcia, Ibn Hud, and all his feudal retainers had become tributary vassals of the king of Castile. This policy continued until 1257, precisely the moment when Alfonso, faced with substantial expenses associated with his quest for the imperial crown, sought to increase royal revenues in the conquered territories by embarking upon a new and more ambitious course of action. Lands in Murcia, formerly s­ heltered by the Treaty of Alcaraz, were now partitioned and apportioned among Christian colonizers who in ever-increasing numbers came into direct conflict with the Mudéjar population. By 1258, the previous Castilian administrative structure in Murcia, the office of merino held by García Suárez, had been replaced by Alfonso García, adelantado mayor or military governor of the kingdom, a measure taken to address the reality of increasing tensions between Mudéjars and Christians that now called for a more aggressive management of the territories.61 Between 1258 and 1263, Alfonso continued to alienate and alarm his Mudéjar vassals in Andalusia with determined efforts to launch a crusade against North Africa, the sack of Salé, and the siege of ­Niebla, ­political posturing that seemed to assure the king of Granada, ­Mohammed I Ibn al-Ahmar, that he would be the next to fall victim to the t­erritorial ambitions of the king of Castile. Taking a cue from Alfonso X, Ibn al-Ahmar went on the offensive and surreptitiously entered into an agreement with Abu Yusuf, the Marinid emir of Morocco, and other Mudéjar leaders throughout Andalusia to orchestrate an uprising designed to throw off the oppressive yoke of Castile. By 6 April 1264 Infante Manuel was in Toledo, where he and his brothers were signatories to several privileges issued by the king.62 A month later the Mudéjar insurrection began with an attempt by the Moors of Seville to capture the king and his family in the royal palace. We may assume, lacking any evidence to the contrary, that Manuel had returned to the royal court in Seville shortly before the uprising and that he was present during the initial assault on the palace as recounted by Jaime I in his Crònica, where he also remarks that the conspiracy was so effectively organized that within three short weeks the rebels had captured three hundred cities, villages, and castles.63 The Castilian response was not long in coming. Alfonso and his alférez, having succesfully repulsed the immediate threat from the Mudejárs of Seville and with that city now secured, began to organize a counteroffensive against the leader of the uprising, Ibn al-Ahmar, and the kingdom of Granada. At this point, Ballesteros makes an interesting though chronologically inaccurate observation based on Cantiga 366: “The King of Castile returned to the city where he lay prostrate in bed and Infante Manuel, who had heeded his call for help, also fell ill as a

100

Dawn of a Dynasty

result of the rigours of the campaign.”64 This particular cantiga, however, refers to events that took place not in 1264 but in 1281.65 Though the CAX errors in dating the Mudéjar rebellion to 1261 (10.29), it nevertheless provides significant details about the aftermath of the attack on the royal family in Seville, informing us that soon after, Mudéjar rebels overran the town of Jerez (14.38). Given the proximity of Jerez to Seville, the king’s immediate response was to besiege the citadel, an undertaking that, according to the CAX, lasted five months, from May to October, a period that coincides with the traditional date of the city’s recapture by the Castilian army on 9 October.66 Infante ­Manuel must have played a significant role in the liberation of Jerez, since he figures prominently in land grants subsequently awarded in the partition of the city that same year.67 Following the defeat of Jerez, the CAX relates that Alfonso “proceeded to Vejer, and to Medina Sidonia and to Rota and to Sanlúcar and the Moors who held these towns turned them over to the king. And he resettled Puerto de Santa María and from there entered Arcos and Lebrija. And he expelled the Moors who had risen up against him there and the castle of Arcos was surrendered to him and he resettled these towns with Christians ... and returned to Seville to determine his next move in this war that he had begun” (14.39–40). The two documents that Manuel confirms in the course of this campaign fully support the details provided by the Crónica while authenticating what must have been his own rather substantial role as the king’s alférez in quelling the rebellion. The first, a privilege granted by Alfonso X to the Order of Calatrava in Seville on 27 October 1264, declares that it is a reward “for services rendered during the war which the king of Granada waged against us.”68 The second document, a royal privilege granting to Arcos the fuero or laws of Seville and despatched on 13 November, reflects the king’s recent policy to resettle former Mudéjar towns with Christian colonists and impose a Christian judicial system.69 Manuel spent the rest of the year with the royal court in Seville, where on 29 December he confirmed a bequest by the sovereign ceding Osuna to the master and brothers of the Order of Calatrava.70 At this point, his principal responsibility was to support his brother in the ongoing campaign to negotiate a settlement with Ibn al-Ahmar and the rebellious Mudéjars of Andalusia. In the meantime, Jaime I had been fully apprised of the urgency of the uprising by his daughter, Queen Violante, who had sent an emissary to plead with her father to come to the rescue of Castile.71 The forces led by Alfonso X and Infante Manuel now found themselves so completely bogged down in repairing the damage inflicted in the



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

101

immediate vicinity of Seville and the pursuit of Ibn al-Ahmar in the kingdom of Granada, that they had few resources available to punish the insurgents in the kingdom of Murcia. That particular task would be left to Jaime I and the armies of Aragón. Upon receiving his daughter’s plea for help, Jaime’s first move was to convoke cortes in Barcelona in July and then in Zaragoza during ­November 1264 in order to secure the funding he would need to pursue the war against the rebels in the kingdom of Murcia. The following ten months were spent in the challenging recruitment and provisioning of an army that many Aragonese were not eager to join. On 15 February 1265, Infante Manuel was still in Seville, where he confirmed a privilege given by the king to Almansa granting it the fuero or laws of Cuenca, establishing the boundaries of the town council, and ceding certain exemptions to the town previously granted to Alicante.72 These activities clearly indicate that there were municipalities that had remained loyal to Castile during the ongoing insurgency, and they were now being rewarded for their allegiance with valuable concessions. Almansa had been ceded to Castile by Jaime I in the 1244 Treaty of Almizra and incorporated into the kingdom of Murcia in 1257; it would later form an important part of Infante Manuel’s Señorío de Villena.73 On 12 March of the following month, Manuel, still in Seville, was a signatory to a document ceding the town of Santaella to Córdoba.74 By 20 August 1265 Manuel was in Alicante, where he issued an ­assurance to the Mudéjars of Elche pledging to pardon them for their ­sedition if they would surrender to him. Contrary to what we have been led to believe by many historians, the text of Infante Manuel’s proposal to the inhabitants of Elche reveals him to be a reasonable i­ndividual who seems entirely willing to work for an equitable solution with his feudal retainers: Let  all to whom these presents come know that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Fernando, offer my assurance and that of those who may come after me, to the alguaziles [officials], and alfaquis [advisers] and good men and elders and to the entire town of Elche and the surrounding area, of my solemn promise and guarantee and the faith of God and his truth. And we pledge our faith and our integrity that they will be safe and ­secure for our part and on the part of those who may come after us and who may inherit from us, and we guarantee that their wives and their children and their companions and all their household goods will not be liable for any wrongs they may have committed, either for the murder of Christians and of Jews or the insurrection in Elche, or whosoever of our men or any others whom they may have taken prisoner, nor for anything

102

Dawn of a Dynasty

they may have stolen from us such as arms and equipment and animals and clothes and food and any other things whatsoever, that they shall not be fined for whatever they may have been liable to repay up until now. And we relieve them of all taxes for which they may have been liable to pay us in the past and to provide them full guarantee that they will not be held responsible for any of the aforesaid things either on our part or on the part of those who may come after us. Likewise, we promise them on behalf of ourselves and those who may come after us that all those who wish to leave Elche for other places may travel safely and securely in their persons and property to wherever they may wish to go; and he who may wish to sell his property and possessions may do so and take the proceeds with him and he who wishes to leave for the protection of another may do so together with his rights. And likewise, we pledge to observe the laws and religious rights and customs of all who come to live in Elche and its jurisdiction even as it was before the war began and that we will not add or subtract anything whatsoever. Furthermore, we pledge to maintain the Port of Santa Pola just as it was before the war and whatsoever Moors may come to this port, to either remain there or pass through, that they may be safe and secure and pay taxes just as they did before the war. And let the Moors who lived in Elche and its jurisdiction pay us the taxes and tithes and rights just as they used to nor will we impose upon them other customs other than those they had from us before. And this we do so that they may receive our forgiveness and our benevolence just as they have always enjoyed it. And this we promise them in good faith and to loyally keep our word and give them our charter written in Latin and Arabic and sealed with our seal [Fig. 21] in testimony of the good faith we and all those who come after us profess toward them forever. And we promise that we will protect and defend them from all who would do them harm either by land or by sea and we therefore promise and assure them and those who may come after us of our faith and the truth of God and our own that we will keep our word and fulfil our promises even as it is written in this charter given in Alicante by our command this Thursday, the twentieth day of ­August in the Era of one thousand and three hundred and three years [1265]. Juan Pérez wrote this.75

His assurances apparently had little effect, since the Moors of Elche were still openly defiant towards Infante Manuel when Jaime I began negotiations with them four months later in December. Meanwhile, the king was in in Córdoba until 25 August, and we have no notice of him after that until 23 September, when we find him in Jerez. ­Ballesteros asserts that it was precisely during these dates that Alfonso held a crucial meeting with Ibn al-Ahmar in Alcalá de Benzayde where the



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

103

beleaguered renegade, cognizant of the pledged support and proximate arrival of Jaime I and his Aragonese army in Murcia, eagerly sought an agreement with his Castilian adversary promising to indemnify him for the insurrection and forfeit half his annual revenues in the amount of 250,000 maravedís.76 During the fall of 1265, then, it appears that ­Alfonso X had adopted a new strategy for dealing with the insurrection: Infante Manuel, his alférez, would concentrate on attempting to reconcile the Mudéjars of Murcia while the king negotiated with the rebels in ­Granada. This two-pronged approach could only have been undertaken with the knowledge that Jaime I was fully committed to opening a new eastern front against the rebels in Murcia. From this point forward, most of what we know about Infante Manuel’s role in the suppression of the rebellion is provided by his father-in-law’s version of the events in the Crònica o Llibre dels feits. An autobiographical account of the reign of James I from 1213 to 1276, the Crònica is rendered, not in Latin like the majority of the chronicles from that era, but in vernacular Catalan infused with an easy, colloquial charm reflective of the fact that it was dictated by a monarch who, while certainly cultured, was largely illiterate. Coincidentally, the subtitle of the work, The Book of Deeds, reveals what must certainly have been the king’s underlying aspiration to represent himself as an epic heroe in the medieval mould of the cantares de gesta. While informative and entertaining, the Crònica, written towards the end of his life, was reconstructed from memory and contains numerous chronological ­inaccuracies that modern historians have been able to revise with reference to contemporary documents such as those collected and analysed by Miret i Sans’s Itinerari de Jaume I “el Conqueridor.” By the time he finally reached Valencia on 26 October 1265, Jaime I had only managed to enlist six hundred knights among the more than two thousand he had summoned.77 From Valencia, the Aragonese monarch proceded to Játiva, where he arrived on 5 November, and from there to Biar several days later, from whence he sent a delegation to the Mudéjar insurgents in Villena roughly ten kilometres to the west, an episode he recounts in the Llibre dels feits: In the morning I myself went to the place, and they came out to me. There I took aside thirty of the best people of the town and asked how they had come to do such a thing, rising up against their lord, Don Manuel. Though they had committed a great error, I said I would accept their excuses and would willingly persuade him to pardon them, for he was so beholden to me that he would do whatever I asked. If they refused, I would be obliged to use violence against them and they must realize that they would be

104

Dawn of a Dynasty

unable to defend themselves against my forces. Therefore it would be best for them to let me reconcile them with Don Manuel so that they could keep their houses and their lands rather than having to abandon them and go into exile where they might not be able to gain a living nor find any one to help them. They told me that they greatly appreciated what I had said, but that Don Manuel’s cruel conduct towards them had forced them to rise up against him. And they said that we should return to Biar and that by that same night they would reach a decision. [chap. 410] ... That night they sent me two Saracens, one of whom knew romance [e la u d’aquells era llatinat] and they said that if we would return the following day to Villena that they would all swear on their religion that if, when Don Manuel came there he would accept the terms they made with me and would pardon them, they would surrender the town. If, however, Don Manuel would not pardon them, then they would not recognize the terms of the agreement. If, on the other hand, I would swear to keep Villena and not deliver it to the king of Castile or to Don Manuel but would go there myself, they would surrender it to me. I told them that I appreciated what they had to say and that the following morning I would meet them in Villena and would deal with them in such a manner that they would be satisfied with me and that I would have the terms of the agreement drawn up between them and me. [chap. 411] ... Next morning I went to Villena, and made written agreements with them that they would surrender the town to Don Manuel when he came and that I would persuade him to pardon them and to observe the original capitulations made with them twenty years earlier. [chap. 412]

In these few brief passages that detail events taking place between 5 and 12 November 1265, Jaime I sets the tone for his entire armed intervention in Murcia. He is portrayed as a magnanimous monarch to whom the rebels would gladly surrender, but one who has made a commitment to Infante Manuel to restore these former vassals to their rightful overlord. Manuel is exposed as a cruel master who has betrayed their trust and reneged on the promises made twenty years earlier in the Treaty of Almizra. Unlike his father-in-law, Manuel would seem to rely less on diplomacy than on brute force, and in every negotiation Jaime I undertakes in this context, the contrast between their two ­administrative styles is abundantly clear: Jaime is the soul of sincerety, scrupulously candid and direct; Manuel is mendacious, deceitful, and insincere. The truth between these two divergent perspectives, as we shall see, lies somewere in between. Departing Villena, Jaime I travelled south to Elda and from there to Alicante, where he arrived on 18 November: “From Villena I went to



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

105

Elda and did not take up my quarters in the town because the Saracens there had not duly surrendered to Don Manuel to whom they belonged. They sent to me to plead that no one would ravage their lands or do them harm for they would readily submit to my will. They requested we provide guards and men to protect them and their crops from harm and we did so” (chap. 413). Ironically, the Aragones monarch at this juncture does not seem to be bent on conquering Murcia by dint of arms, but rather by peacekeeping efforts that would protect the rebels from Infante Manuel and overzealous Christians whom the insurgents believed would ravage their fields and destroy their towns in retalliation. Did Jaime I meet with Manuel in Alicante at this time? We know from our last documented encounter with the infante that he was in ­Alicante on 20 August, and we have no reason to believe he had ­departed from there since that date. Curiously, Jaime mentions no such meeting, though it seems evident from the events that follow that the two had to have met each other in that city around 18 November, since all of the negotiations that now take place between the Aragonese and the rebel Mudéjars are in towns centred around Alicante along a route from Villena, to Elda, to Alicante, to Elche, and then to Orihuela with an average distance of only thirty kilometres between them. Moreover, ­Orihuela was a Christian stronghold in the kingdom of Murcia, a town to which ­Alfonso X had recently given the fueros or laws of Alicante, on 23 ­August 1265, in recognition of their support for him in the war effort.78 Manuel, then, had most likely been posted by his brother to Orihuela or Alicante earlier in the month, and Oirhuela would continue to play an important role in the reconquest of Murcia in the coming months. From Alicante, the king of Aragón despatched mesengers to nearby Elche indicating his desire to confer with their leaders, as he relates in the Crònica: and the people of Elche sent me Mahomet Abingalip and another ... And I said to them ... “I have come into this land with these two purposes: those who rise against me and will not submit, I will conquer and they shall die by the sword. Those who will place themselves at my mercy shall receive it; they shall remain in their houses and keep their possessions and their religion. I will see that the king of Castile and Don Manuel observe both the agreements they made with you and your customs according to the treaties existing between you; and if the king and Don Manuel have not kept any of these terms, they will make it up to you.” [chap. 416] ... To this the Saracen replied ... they would certainly inform the community of what

106

Dawn of a Dynasty

I had said and would then return to me ... I then said to the Saracen named Mahomet that I wished to speak to him in private. I took him aside and begged him to look out for my interests. I promised to give him, besides what he himself possessed in Elche, enough for him and his family to be rich forever and that he would be in charge of the town and its revenues, first for me and afterwards for Don Manuel. I then dropped into the sleeve of his gown three hundred besants ... he was delighted and swore on his religion that he would do all he could to support me. [chap. 417] ... The following day, Mahomet came again with ... a letter from the sheikhs of the town as to what I should and should not do. These were the things they demanded: one, that they should remain there with all their possessions; another, that they might continue to observe their religion reciting the call to prayer from the top of their mosque; another, that they might be judged according to Saracen customs and not be subjected to Christian courts ... These terms I granted and assured them that if they had given offence to Don Manuel, I would see to it that the king of Castile and Don Manuel pardoned them and observed the terms of the agreements they made with me. [chap. 418]

The conditions were finally agreeable to all parties involved but in the interim, before Jaime I had actually arrived in Elche to personally seal the accord, he relates a brief interlude when, between 8 and 16  ­ December, he travelled to Alcaraz to meet with his son-in-law ­Alfonso X, daughter Queen Violante, and their court. Though neither the Llibre dels feits nor the Aragonese king’s Itinerari gives any indication of the dates of the meeting, Alfonso’s Itinerario records that he was in Alcaraz on 8 December.79 Jaime continues his narrative, remarking: I then departed from there and went to Alcaraz with my sons and three hundred knights and met in that town with the king of Castile. And before I entered Alcaraz, the king of Castile came out to meet me at a league’s distance and he had with him about sixty knights and I had upwards of three hundred with me. I had left behind in Orihuela three hundred more together with about two hundred Almogavars. When the king saw me, he was very happy and pleased that we had come. At Alcaraz I found the queen with her children and Berenguela Alfonso who later accompanied me to Aragón. And here we discussed the matter of the Saracens at length and we remained in Alcaraz for eight days and greatly enjoyed ourselves. (chap. 432)

While no doubt much of the Aragonese monarch’s enjoyment was ­derived from the presence there of his paramour, Berenguela Alfonso,



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

107

daughter of Alfonso de Molina and the Castilian king’s first cousin, he was undoubtedly glad to see his daughter Violante. Again, Jaime I makes no mention of Infante Manuel in this context, nor does he allude to his daughter Constanza, Manuel’s wife and the Aragonese monarch’s younger daughter. All evidence points to the fact that Jaime I left Infante Manuel in charge of the garrison at Orihuela where he had stationed three hundred knights and two hundred Almogavars, but what of Constanza? We cannot assume she was in Alicante with her husband in August. But if not, and she had remained in Seville, why had she failed to accompany her sister Queen Violante to the family reunion with their ­father in Alcaraz? Unfortunately, we know that Constanza would depart this world within the next three months, so that her absence at Alcaraz looms as an ominous sign she was most likely incapacitated and unable to attend the reunion. Her daughter, Violante Manuel, is reported to have been born in 1265, so perhaps her failure to appear at Alcaraz in December was due to her condition at that moment, one that would later lead to her unexpected demise. We know Jaime I had returned to the coast and Elche by 21 ­December and on his way there would pass through Orihuela, where he had ­stationed his Aragonese garrison together with those Christian troops headed by Infante Manuel. There he recounts an incident where the insurgents in Granada attempted to supply the rebels in Murcia with provisions they would need to resist the forthcoming siege of that city: When I had been in Orihuela for eight days, two Almogavars from Lorca came knocking at my gate one night and it must have been nearly ­midnight. They said that the people of Lorca had sent word that eight ­hundred light horsemen with two thousand loaded mules and two thousand armed men to escort them were about to deliver supplies to M ­ urcia and that they had passed by Lorca at sunset and that if I went out to e­ ngage them I could gain possession of the entire baggage train ... When I heard this, I orded the guards to rise at once and to rouse Infante Don Pedro, Infante Don Jacme, Don Manuel, the master of Uclés, and the one who was there as a substitute for the master of the Templars, the master of the Hospitallers, and Don Alfonso Garcia and the rest of the barons, and to tell them to prepare to ride and to go to the bridge gate where they would find me. [chap. 423] ... When it was daylight, we held a meeting to ­determine what we should do. Infante Don Pedro, Infante Don Jacme, Don Manuel, the master of Uclés, Don Pedro Guzmán, and Don Alfonso García were at that council and they thought it best to move thence, and send scouts out to report if the enemy were coming or not. And I told them I did not

108

Dawn of a Dynasty

think that was good advice since the practice of the zenetes or Moorish light cavalry with those whom they encountered was to keep riding round and round the heavily armed horsemen until they finally exhausted them. I would have one hundred armoured cavalry of my own and the rest without armour. In the vanguard would be my two sons, while Don Manuel, the master of Uclés, and Don Pedro Guzmán would be on the flank and I with one hundred armoured horses would bring up the rear guard. If we met with the zenetes, no one was to charge till I ordered the trumpets to sound. When they heard the trumpets sound, those with unarmoured horses were to break ranks and charge the Moors and not leave until they had captured or killed them all. [chap. 424]

Though Infante Manuel was a member of the military council that advised the king of Aragón, he does not appear to have played a prominent role among them. The most experienced soldiers were undoubtedly Pelay Pérez Correa, master of Uclés or the Order of S ­ antiago and Alfonso García, adelantado mayor de tierra de Murcia y Andalucía, both long-time friends and allies of Manuel. They, together with ­Pedro ­Guzmán, adelantado mayor de Castilla, formed the leadership of the ­Castilian military forces in Murcia at that juncture. The battle with the rebels and their supply train was brief. The Moors quickly retreated to the castle of Alhama a short distance away, whereupon Jaime judged any attempt to dislodge them at that stage would be unwise, and the sortie was abandoned. Though the Aragones king asserts the incident took place shortly before he was scheduled to meet with Alfonso in Alcaraz, ­another compelling reason for him to sidestep an assault on Alhama, the itineraries of the two monarchs suggest, rather, that the attack on the supply train took place during the last week of December. Jaime I subsequently recounts the difficulties he encountered with the recalictrant inhabitants of Villena, who refused to be reconciled with Infante Manuel, and of his success in this same context with the Mudéjars of Elche: Then we returned to Orihuela and on the way there skirmished with some zenetes. And Don Manuel came with me since the Saracens had promised me that if he accompanied me they would surrender Villena to him according to the treaty they had made with me and that if he did not come they would deliver the town to me. I gave the Saracens of Villena notice that I was coming and that Don Manuel was with me; they, however, would not come out to meet him and therefore broke the treaty and the oath they had sworn on their religion. From Villena I went to Nonpot [modern-day Monforte del Cid], and from Nonpot to Elche, and while we were in Elche,



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

109

I turned over the tower called La Calahorra and the whole town to Don Manuel. The following day, I entered Orihuela where I found my people happy and content since they had made several raids into the territory of Murcia and had been very successful in some of them. And I arrived here four days before Christmas and stayed in Orihuela until New Year’s Eve. [chap. 433] ... And the day after New Year’s Day, I proceeded to lay siege to Murcia. [chap. 434]

If we were to judge Infante Manuel’s conduct towards his M ­ udéjar subjects solely on the basis of what we know of him from his father-in-law’s account, we could only conclude that Manuel was ­overbearing and somewhat devious with regard to the rules and regulations he seems to have conveniently overlooked in his dealings with the i­nhabitants of Villena and Elche. If, however, we examine the document he issued to the Mudéjars of Elche on 20 August 1265, pardoning them for their insurrection against him, we discover an entirely different overlord whose apparent concern for their welfare and generous terms of surrender can only be characterized as benevolent in the extreme. It is, then, difficult to avoid the conclusion that Jaime’s narrative is overly self-serving and tacitly critical of Infante Manuel who, on the other hand, is praised by the early twentieth-century historian of Elche Pedro Ibarra y Ruiz as the most important figure in the history of the town: One may assert that Infante Don Manuel was the most important personage, the most outstanding figure and the supreme creator of our institutions. He obtained for Elche all the privileges that the kings of Castile had formerly given to Toledo, Seville, and Murcia. He acquired from his brother confirmation of many other privileges that he was then able to dictate exclusively to Elche and was the generous donor who, once in ­possession of Elche, gave up for our benefit a large part of his feudal ­domain so that Moorish Elche, whose unfortunate inhabitants had r­ ecently surrendered, might not suffer the terrible consequences that await all conquered people.80

Murcia had capitulated by the end of January, and Jaime I was able to enter the defeated city on 3 February81 (Fig. 22). Commenting on the moment, the king of Aragón recalls: I sent two adalides [officers] to the king of Castile with my letters bidding him to take over the city ... and the twenty-eight other castles between Murcia and Lorca which had surrendered to me. Murcia was then restored

110

Dawn of a Dynasty

to Don Alfonso García and he took possession of the alcázar and placed his guards within it. I remained there with him until a message came from the king of Castile saying that he would soon send his counsel and that he greatly appreciated our message and the kindness we had shown him. And here I colonized the land with some ten thousand men-at-arms from my own country and from other parts that they might stay there with Don Alfonso García and support him. (chap. 453)

Though under the circumstances it seems unlikely that Infante ­ anuel had not accompanied his father-in-law during the subsequent M siege of Murcia following the surrender of Elche in December 1265, the Llibre dels feits does not mention his name again. In fact, Jaime I underscores the fact that he gave the city to the adelantado de Murcia y ­Andalucía, Alfonso García, contradicting the text of the CAX, which asserts that ­Alfonso X conquered Murcia and then turned it over to Infante ­Manuel.82 ­Ballesteros, reciting an extensive list of the Aragonese who are named by Jaime I in the Llibre dels feits, gratuitously adds: “A éstos hay que agregar los castellanos Alfonso García de Villamayor, Don Pedro de Guzmán y el infante Don Manuel.”83 The first document confirmed by Infante Manuel in the year 1266, however, places him in ­Seville on 22  April.84 Furthermore, when the Mudéjars of Murcia ­officially ­renounced their fealty to the king of Aragón, pledging their ­loyalty to Alfonso X on 23 June 1266, Manuel’s name is once again entirely absent from this critical text that affirms the city was transferred not to the infante but to Lope Sánchez, master of the Knights Templar, Pedro Núñez, master of the Order of Santiago, and Alfonso García, ­adelantado mayor en el regno de Murcia et en toda la frontera.”85 Where, then, was Manuel during the siege of Murcia and its immediate aftermath? From March 1266, we possess documentary evidence of ongoing negotiations to arrange a marriage between Infante Manuel and Constance de Béarn, indicating that some time during December 1265 or January 1266 Constanza de Aragón had departed this life. She certainly had not been despatched by her older sister, Queen Violante, with a basket of poisoned cherries, as Juan Manuel suggests in the ­Libro de las armas.86 Manuel, perhaps apprised of Constanza’s impending demise, must have returned to the royal court in Seville early in the month of January, and by March was actively engaged in the search for a new spouse. The text of the marriage contract dictated by Alfonso X in Seville on 12 March stipulates that Infante Manuel will wed Constance, daughter of Gaston VII, viscount of Béarn, and his wife Amata, while his son, Alfonso Manuel, will espouse Guillelma, Constance’s younger sister,



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

111

with the ceremony to take place before the forthcoming Assumption of the Virgin Mary on 15 August.87 Constance was in her teens at the time, while Guillelma was about seven; Infante Manuel was thirty-two and his son about five. Because Constance de Béarn had earlier married Infante Alfonso de Aragón, the eldest son of Jaime I, who died in March 1260, the pope refused to sanction her marriage to Manuel on grounds of consanguinity, since Infante Alfonso was both Constanza de Aragón’s half-brother and Manuel’s brother-in-law.88 Ballesteros believed the marriages never took place because Alfonso Manuel, had died though he was still very much alive until the summer of 1275.89 In 1269, Constance de Béarn would marry the son of Richard of Cornwall, Henry of Almain, shortly after he travelled to Rome to plead his father’s case for the imperial crown with Clement IV. A year later, in 1270, Infante Manuel’s nephew, twelve-year-old Sancho, was betrothed to eleven-year-old Guillelma de Béarn, whom he promptly repudiated because she was, he claimed, “fea y brava.”90 Infante Manuel’s absence during the siege of Murcia would later give rise to serious discord between his son Juan Manuel and Jaime’s grandson, Jaime II, who occupied Murcia in 1296. Although Jaime II returned much of the land to Castile eight years later in the Treaty of Torrellas, he managed to retain for himself a substantial portion of Infante Manuel’s former holdings, which by then had been inherited by Juan Manuel. Pertinent passages from the Crónica de Ramon Muntaner, composed around 1325, are instructive in this regard. Muntaner asserts that after Jaime I conquered Murcia in 1266: He gave all of the land, both his part and the rest of it, to his son-in-law, the king of Castile, so that among themselves they might be able to help each other. And, specifically, he gave to his son-in-law, Infante Don ­Manuel, Elche, the Valley of Elda and Novelda, Aspe and Petrer. And the king of Castile, Don Alfonso, made the said Infante Don Manuel adelantado of his portion and in this way everyone in these lands could help each other and defend each other against the Moors. However, in that agreement King James of Aragón gave his portion of the kingdom of Murcia to his son-in-law, Don Alfonso of Castile, and to his son-in-law, Infante Don ­Manuel, on the condition that whenever he wanted it back, they would return it to him. And this is what they promised him and it was thus specified in the charters. It is for this reason that the House of Aragón has taken back these places.91

The Aragonese perspective on the restoration of the kingdom of ­Murcia to Alfonso and Manuel is clear: Jaime I had transferred the territory

112

Dawn of a Dynasty

he won in the reconquest to his two sons-in-law only temporarily and ­until such time as he might want it back. Alfonso, who r­ eceived all of the kingdom of Murcia, would convey his share to I­nfante Manuel, while Manuel would receive from his father-in-law the towns of Elche, Elda, Novelda, Aspe, and Petrer. With regard to the specifics of the 1304 Treaty of Torrellas, Muntaner relates: And the king of Aragón restored the kingdom of Murcia to King Don ­Fernando, except for the part he had conquered, that his grandfather, King James I, had given as a dowry for his daughter to Don Manuel, the brother of King Alfonso of Castile. And since that lady died without children, the land had to be returned to the king of Aragón and because of King James’s great friendship with his son-in-law, King Alfonso, and with ­Infante Don Manuel, who was also his son-in-law, he allowed Don ­Manuel to keep the land. And now the king of Aragón wants it back and by rights and with reason; and thus in this peace treaty, he will recover it, that is, ­Alicante, Elche, Aspe, Petrer, the Valley of Elda and Novelda, and la Mola, ­Crevillente, Abanilla, Callosa, Orihuela, and Guardamar.92

In effect, Muntaner asserts that the territory Jaime II claimed in 1296 was precisely the land his grandfather had given to Infante Manuel following the siege of Murcia as a dowry for his daughter, Constanza, Manuel’s wife, who Muntaner mistakenly contends had expired without issue even though Violante Manuel lived until 1306. Jaime I, in his last will and testament, reconfirmed that he was leaving nothing else to Infante Manuel and his children with Constanza now deceased (quondam filiae nostrae), excepting whatever he had given her as a dowry.93 Thus Juan Manuel’s later lament in the Libro de las armas that “el rey Don Fernando dio al rey de Aragon aquella tierra, que era mia” (1.133) is poignantly accurate, and we may surmise that had Infante Manuel perhaps been more aggressive in pursuing his interests in Murcia during the insurrection and subsequent reconquest, both he and his heirs would have had fewer problems defending their lands against future claims by the Aragonese monarchy. The foregoing widely divergent views projected by the Llibre dels feits, the Crónica de Ramon Muntaner, and the Crónica de Alfonso X concerning ownership of the kingdom of Murcia following the reconquest of 1266 require some scrutiny. The narratives of the king of Aragón and Muntaner entirely exclude any role Alfonso X may have had in the campaign while not merely minimizing but effectively disparaging the roles played by Infante Manuel, Alfonso Garcia, the adelantado mayor



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

113

de Murcia, and Pedro Guzmán, the adelantado mayor de Castilla. Jaime I intimates, without ever stating directly, that Manuel is a cruel and ineffectual master whose Mudéjar vassals refuse to capitulate to him without the benefic intervention and reassurance of the king of Aragón. In the case of the two adelantados, Jaime thought it was inappropriate to hand over Murcia to the two former commanders who had lost the city to the rebels in the first place: “Que teniem per bo ... en rendre la ciutat de Múrcia a Don Alfonso Garcia, ... mas de partir-nos d’aquí, e lleixar la terra a gent de Castella, així com a ell ... e a Don Pero Goçman, que no ho teniem per bé, que, quan ells eren poderoses dels llocs, los perdien” (chap. 452). The panorama of the reconquest of Murcia portrayed by the CAX is at once entirely too brief and diametrically opposed in its portrayal of the events. Here not only are Jaime I and the expeditionary forces of Aragon completely ignored, but Alfonso X is said to have been aided in his conquest of Murcia by the rebel king of Granada, Ibn al-Ahmar: And King Don Alfonso returned to Jaén and set forth with all his people for the kingdom of Murcia. And when Alboaquez, the king of Murcia, learned how the king of Granada had abandoned him and that both kings were advancing against him with large armies ... he came to King Alfonso and placed himself at his mercy ... And King Don Alfonso went to the city of Murcia and Alboaquez and the Moors who were within the city surrendered it to him and he placed his brother Infante Don Manuel in command of the citadel. From there, he went to the other locations which had risen up against him and they surrendered these places to him and the king assigned governors to all of the castles and granted hereditary holdings to many Christians who came there to claim them.94

Once again, the truth is to be found somewhere in the middle of these two extreme interpretations, and Torres Fontes sums it up nicely: Estos y otros muchos hechos de menor categoría, ponen de manifiesto, sin discrepancia alguna, que el reino de Murcia era ya fruta muy madura en los comienzos de noviembre de 1265 en los días en que el rey de Aragón comenzaba su penetración militar en territorio murciano. Pero prueban también que era necesaria esta decisión y presencia del rey Don Jaime para acabar definitivamente su reconquista ... La actividad castellana y de los infantes aragoneses en los meses anteriores por todo el territorio murciano, con sus correrías de castigo y demostración de su potencia bélica, facilitarían extraordinariamente la empresa del rey de Aragón. Los ­ rebeldes murcianos, pese al tiempo transcurrido, no pudieron ni

114

Dawn of a Dynasty

intentaron organizar un ejército capaz de enfrentarse con cualquier hueste cristiana. Tan sólo la escasez de pobladores castellanos hizo posible su ­rebelión, pero nunca pudieron superar sus escasas limitaciones locales y todos sus preparativos bélicos no llegaron más allá de reforzar guarniciones o reparar sus fortalezas.95

If, as Torres Fontes asserts, the operation in Murcia was essentially an easy opportunity to stage a show of force in the area with little chance of loss for either monarch, to what do we owe such divergent views of the campaign? Jaime I, in the Llibre dels feits (chap. 382), alleges three compelling reasons for intervening in Murcia: first, as a father, he could not ignore the pleas of his daughter Violante, queen of Castile; second, Alfonso X was one of the most powerful men in the world (“un dels pus poderoses hòmens del món”), and failing to help him in this ­crisis might well cause him to consider his father-in-law his mortal enemy (“me ­poria tenir per son enemic mortal”); and third, if the king of ­Castile were to lose his land in Murcia, might not the Aragonese be the next to fall to the Saracens? Above all, however, Jaime I could not help but remember how Alfonso and Manuel in the immediate past had aided and abetted his enemies in the kingdom of Valencia, and that this would be the perfect opportunity to show them that he was the better man of the three and perhaps, at this juncture, the most powerful of them all. Muntaner’s Crónica, on the other hand, was composed, according to the author himself, between 1325 and 1328 during the reign of ­Alfonso XI and at a time when Aragón had already taken advantage of the weakness of Castile during the reign of his father, Fernando IV, and most recently, of his own youth and inexperience. Muntaner unconditionally supports the Aragonese territorial claims against Castile, utilizing whatever facts he can find in the Llibre dels feits to sustain his contentions, and for the same reasons Alfonso XI later commissioned the Crónica de Alfonso X: to establish the historical authenticity of his own territorial rights. Subsequently, when the CAX relates the conquest of Murcia in 1266, the Aragonese are nowhere to be found when ­Alfonso and Infante Manuel take the city not by force but by threat alone. In this way, the CAX preserves unbroken the line of ownership from the original conquest of Murcia, its capitulation to Infante Alfonso in 1243 and the Treaty of Almizra in 1244, to the surrender of the city in the reconquest of 1266 with no intervention whatsoever on the part of Aragón, which, ipso facto, ceases to have any legitimate claims on the kingdom of Murcia. Until about the middle of July, Infante Manuel remained in Seville, where he confirmed at least nine chancery documents of which we are



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

115

aware. Nearly every one of these texts refers to Alfonso’s subsequent ­attempts to resettle the kingdom of Murcia with Christian colonists, most of whom were soldiers. Unlike the policies of Jaime I, who believed in the creation of large feudal demesnes occupied by the nobility and supported by a peasant Mudéjar population, Alfonso X opted for an organizational procedure that favoured partitioning the conquered territory into smaller appanages populated by large numbers of C ­ hristian men-at-arms who, like the Castilian colonists in the north, worked side by side with the indigenous population to provide for a more h ­ armonious and certainly more robust economy.96 On 22 April, Alfonso granted the fuero of Córdoba to the nearby town of Écija, a charter confirmed by “El ynfante Don Manuel, hermano del rey e su alférez.”97 Other documents duly endorsed by Manuel were given on May 14 and 19 when the king granted the fuero of Seville to Murcia while establishing an annual fair within the city. On 20 May, Alfonso gave the castles and villages of Antequera and Archidona to the ­Order of Santiago at such time as they might be recaptured.98 This donation was followed a day later by a royal privilege, also confirmed by I­ nfante Manuel, granting to the master of Santiago, Pelay Pérez Correa, land and houses in Murcia, Orihuela, Algorfa, and Lorca, no doubt as a ­reward for his recent military service in securing these three towns, ­especially Orihuela and Algorfa, which are located to the northeast of Murcia and just to the south of Elche and the Tierra de Don Manuel.99 In Seville on 4 June Manuel confirms a royal donation issued to the Monasterio de Dueñas, Villa de Caleruega, in the bishopric of Osma.100 Still in Seville a month later, on 15 July, he is a signatory to a royal privilege circumscribing the limits of Orihuela, including Crevillente, land that was later to become part of his domain.101 On this same day in Barcelona, Jaime I appointed Guillén I de Rocafull and Miquel ­Violeta as royal procurators to arrange a marriage between his son, Crown Prince Jaime de Mallorca, and Beatrice of Savoy.102 The nuptials never took place, however, and Infante Jaime later married Esclaramunda, daughter of Roger IV, count of Foix, while Beatrice was wed to Pierre de Chalon and, at his death in 1274, married Infante Manuel the following year.103 Coincidentally, the daughter of Jaime de Mallorca and ­Esclarmunda, Isabel de Mallorca, was married to Infante Manuel’s son, Juan Manuel, in 1299.104 From the middle of July to 11 December, Manuel appears to have been absent from the royal court, and we may surmise that he was most likely tending to his affairs in Murcia, where his brother was assiduously pursuing his own resettlement policies. During this hiatus, we have a series of interesting entries from the Repartimiento de Orihuela

116

Dawn of a Dynasty

with no specific day or month that attest to land granted there to certain men-at-arms, mounted soldiers in the service of Infante Manuel.105 These sizable grants were taken from Manuel’s own caballerías, land designated for distribution among the members of an expeditionary force that had participated in the conquest of a territory and who were expected to settle the land and remain there to assure the defence of the city in which they had now become vecinos or residents. These grants reaffirm Infante Manuel’s active participation in quelling the ­Mudéjar insurrection and indicate that he led his own armed forces in the ­conquest of Orihuela for which he was now rewarding his best soldiers with land of their own. The grants must have been made while ­Manuel sojourned in the kingdom of Murcia during the fall of 1266 and correspond to what Torres Fontes refers to as the second phase of the reapportionment of the kingdom of Murcia.106 Among the few accounts chronicling Manuel’s activities during the fall of 1266 is a remarkable document from 28 October testifying to his condition as a slaveholder: In the name of Allah the merciful and compassionate. Pedro Yoanex, servant of Don Martín Fernández, Comendador of the Order of Calatrava in Madrid, sold to Miguel Pérez, representative of Infante Don Manuel in Rodillas [former parish in the archdiocese of Toledo]107 three mamelucos or slaves, to wit: Abdallah b. Abdelaisar, de Iznatoraf; his wife Aixa, daughter of Kásim b. Chobair de Murcia, and Fátima, the young daughter of both, acquired in a true, perfect, and current sale without adverse conditions or clause or option of resale, for the price of 53 legal mizcales alfonsíes.108 The aforesaid seller received from the aforesaid buyer the above-mentioned price which is now in his possession and is his responsibility and declared the buyer free from this debt, transferring to him permanent ownership of the aforesaid slaves, as the rich man possesses his wealth and according to the letter of the law concerning purchases, sales, and return of d ­ amaged goods. The seller also warrants the slaves were not stolen or illegally ­acquired and that the vendor pledges his goods thereto and will reimburse the buyer for the salary of his men, the leasing of beasts of burden, and any other expenses incurred in the act of searching for the vendor in the context of the aforesaid guarantee. In this regard, and as it is recorded in the text, said vendor called in testimony of his person a witness who was present, certifying he is in good health and legally competent to carry out this transaction on 28 October of the year 1304 of the Era española or of Çofar [1266].109

We have no further information indicating why Manuel purchased these slaves or where they served him. The father was from Iznatoraf, province



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

117

of Jaén, while his wife was from Murcia. The Repartimiento de Murcia lists six individuals by the name of Miguel Pérez, two of whom are characterized as peón menor (30–2, 42, 205) and cocinero (52) and therefore not sufficiently qualified to handle a financial transaction such as this. On the other hand, Miguel Pérez, “el Caluiello,” is described as a caballero menor with land holdings in Alguasta and Beninaia amounting to five alffabas (57) and was thus a man of some substance. Miguel Pérez de ­Calatayud is classified as one who lost his land because he was absent, and nothing further is known of him (29). However, Miguel Pérez, clérigo (22), and Miguel Pérez, cirugiano (205, 221), may well have been vassals of Infante Manuel, especially the latter, of whose holdings in Casiellas, Aliada, Aluazta, Aljuçer, Darder, and Benihiar the Repartimiento account states: “ouolas maestre Michel Pérez, cirugiano, et assi es pagado de las 10 a­ lffabas que le mandó dar el Rey” (Master Miguel Pérez, surgeon, has 10 alffabas that the king commanded to be given to him) (221). The surgeon, then, would have been personally known to the monarch, and thus we may speculate that Infante M ­ anuel knew him too. While slavery in medieval Iberia was widespread, especially in Portugal, ­Andalusia, and the Crown of Aragón, there is scant evidence of its presence in ­Castile during the thirteenth century, even though the Siete Partidas contains some very specific comments thereon that lead us to suspect it was entrenched in the culture of that era.110 In this regard, Phillips reports that “slaves in Castile were almost exclusively Muslim in origin during the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries” (61) and that “welloff families usually had at least two slaves. Wealthier families owned greater numbers” (105). Jaime I’s enslavement of thousands of Muslim captives is well documented, while Barcelona and Valencia were the two most important centres of the slave trade in the Iberian Peninsula.111 On 11 December in Seville, Alfonso issued a charter, confirmed by ­Infante Manuel, establishing the boundaries of the diocese of ­Cartegena in which we find, for the first time, a reference to “la tierra de Don ­Manuel,” a territorial entity that Juan Manuel reports arose from the legendary kingdom of “el Alhofra that was always like a separate realm or domain that was never subject to any ruler.”112 The text of the charter is significant in that it asserts that the boundaries here established were those existing before the Mudéjar insurrection, revealing that the Tierra de Don Manuel was already a recognized entity before 1266: We grant the aforementioned bishopric these boundaries, just as they ­existed before the war with the Moors began which was instigated by the king of Granada ...: Alicante with its boundaries also shared with the lands of the king of Aragón; Petrel and Sax and Villena and the land of Don

118

Dawn of a Dynasty

­ anuel, our brother, which shares its boundaries with the lands of the M king of Aragón; and Valle de Ayora as far as Cofrentes which also shares its boundaries with the lands of the King of Aragón; and Jorquera with its boundaries and with the lands of Gonzalo Ruiz de Atienza; and C ­ hinchilla with its boundaries; and the Peñas de San Pedro with its boundaries; and Ontur and Calasparra and Caravaca de la Cruz with their boundaries; ­Torrecilla with its boundaries; and Lorca with its boundaries; and Nogalte with the other castles of Johan García with their boundaries; and the castles of Don Ferrand Pérez de Pina as far as Peña de Águila with their boundaries; and with all the other land within these aforementioned places.113

The domain of Infante Manuel, then, was coterminous with the lands of Juan García de Villamayor, Alfonso’s mayordomo until 1260, a­ delantado mayor de la mar, and brother of Alfonso García, the adelantado mayor de Murcia. The other nobleman whose lands bordered Infante Manuel’s, Ferrán Pérez de Pina, was a vassal of Jaime I of Aragon who had fought in the conquest of Valencia and whom we first encounter as a signatory to a charter issued by Infante Alfonso to the Order of Santiago in Murcia on July 1243, which was also confirmed by Juan García.114 It is quite possible that Fernán Pérez was the father of Pedro Fernández de Pina, who was a messenger despatched by Infante Manuel to the king of Aragón, Pedro III, in October 1280, as the Aragones monarch relates in a letter to Manuel.115 By 18 December, Manuel was in Murcia, where he dispensed a grant of several houses to Pedro Gómez Barroso: Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Fernando, authorize and bestow upon you, Pedro Gómez Barroso, the houses in Murcia which are in your possession and which formerly belonged to Aben Yahyel, and those belonging to Zeugom Abobedy which are in Rabat Zabazala, together with the shops which are located along the walls of the houses together with a corral they have in common which belonged to Zaad Albalenci and which were given to me as an incremental grant. And these houses were given to me by the partitioners ­together with three other sections in the city of Murcia by order of the king. And these three sections are bounded on one side by the public streets and on the other by their shops and on the other by the houses which belonged to Martín Suárez, Orrigo Porcel’s man, and which now belong to master Baldouin. The aforementioned houses are in the parish of Santa Catarina and I assign them to you free and clear forever as hereditary property together with their appurtenances which you may convey, sell, mortgage, exchange or dispose of however you wish as if they were your very own.



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

119

And so that there may be no doubt in this context, I give you my charter sealed with my seal. Given in Murcia this eighteenth day of December, in the Era of one thousand and three hundred and four years [1266].116

Pedro Gómez Barroso was the scion of a distinguished GalicianPortuguese family resident in Toledo since the twelfth century. His grandson of the same name would later become bishop of Cartagena, archbishop of Seville, cardenal of Spain, and great-uncle of the celebrated poet, historian, and chancellor of Castile Pero López de Ayala (1332–1407).117 Gómez Barroso was also a well-known troubador at the court of Alfonso X, and thirteen of his cantigas de amigo (love lyrics) and cantigas de escárnio e maldizer (satirical poems) have been preserved in the three great Galician-Portuguese cancioneiros collected during the reign of King Dinis of Portugal (1261–1325), grandson of Alfonso X.118 For reasons heretofore unknown, Infante Manuel transferred to Gómez Barroso certain properties he had received following the surrender of Murcia in February of the same year. The houses had formerly belonged to the Mudéjar residents Aben Yahyel and Zeugom Abobedy and a Christian colonist, Martín Suárez, who was a feudal retainer of Rodrigo Porcell, the king’s almojarife in Murcia and one of five partitioners selected by Alfonso X on 5 July 1266 to partition Mudéjar property in Murcia among the Christian settlers.119 Martín Suárez subsequently received twenty-two tahúllas120 in Cudiacibit during the third partition of Murcia in 1268.121 Rodrigo Porcell was amply rewarded for his services in a number of different areas, including Cudiacibit.122 In the same partition, Maestre Baldovín de Cartagena received ten tahúllas in ­Rabat Algidit and Aljuçer.123 Ballesteros believes that Maestre ­Baldovín was one of many Italians to receive property in Murcia in the context of Alfonso’s imperial aspirations and the ties he had recently forged with the cities of Lombardy in northern Italy that supported him in this endeavour.124 Be that as it may, Infante Manuel’s unusual and unexplained generosity towards the troubador Pedro Gómez Barroso stands in stark contrast with the habitual munificence displayed by his artistically talented brother and may, perhaps, be the closest Manuel would ever come to being a patron of the arts. On 4 January 1267, we find Manuel in Valencia, where the Llibre de despeses of Infante Pedro’s mayordomo informs us he had been invited to dine with his Aragonese brother-in-law but failed to show: “Cunvidà en est dia el senyor Infant en Manuel et no venc.”125 The following day, however, he made his appearance “e manjà en casa el senyor infant e en Manuel,” together with Pedro’s wife, Constance of Sicily, according to Soldevila.126 Several days later in Montpellier, Jaime I approved

120

Dawn of a Dynasty

payment of certain accounts kept by his sacristan and royal notary, Jaime de Roca, relative to expenses incurred by the king during the expedition to Murcia a year earlier when he provided rations for Infante Manuel, ­Alfonso García, and others: “Et datis vini, farine, cibade ac denariorum ac bisantes ratione vini, farine seu cibate quas pro nobis fecistis dompno Manueli, Alfonsso Garcie et aliis quibuslibet quorumlibet locorum.”127 Between 16 and 25 February Alfonso X was in Badajoz, where he met with Alfonso III, king of Portugal, and his wife Beatrice, ­Alfonso’s ­illegitimate daughter, together with the young crown prince, Don D ­ inis, and the magnates and prelates of both kingdoms.128 Given the significance of the assembly, it is highly likely that the king’s alférez, Infante ­Manuel, was present and actively involved in the negotiations between the two monarchs. The main matter at hand was essentially the release of ­Alfonso III from the traditional feudal obligations he had incurred with his father-in-law, the king of Castile, and recognition of the fact that the two former adversaries were now fast friends and a­ llies.129 For Manuel, the meeting in Badajoz would be an occasion to reinforce ­familial ties with his niece, the queen of Portugal, and his grandnephew, Don Dinis. By 8 April Infante Manuel was back in Seville, where he confirmed a document issued by his brother the king, whose territorial focus since the meeting in Badajoz had been on the Algarve and the nearby boundaries between Gibraleón, Niebla, Huelva, and Saltés, which he now firmly established.130 Aware that Portugal was much on the king’s mind, Alfonso III and his councillors clearly took advantage of the ­Castilian’s goodwill, and the obvious emotional attachments they had observed between the king and his grandson, six-year-old Don Dinis, to send the young lad to Seville sometime between May and September to petition his grandfather to knight him and to release Portugal from its remaining feudal obligation to supply fifty men-at-arms in time of war. The episode, with Infante Manuel’s intervention, is recalled for us in detail by the CAX, although it mistakenly claims, among other things, that the incident occurred in the year 1269:131 While King Alfonso was residing in Seville, his grandson Don Dinis came to visit him ... and asked his grandfather to knight him. And ... this pleased the king greatly ... and the prince also asked his grandfather to release the Portuguese from the tribute they were obliged to pay to the king of León by coming whenever they were summoned in time of war against the Moors. And King Alfonso replied that he could not do so without first conferring with the princes and nobles who were there with him ... and if they agreed, he would gladly do so ... And King Alfonso then called



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

121

together his brothers Don Manuel and Don Felipe ... together with Don Nuño González de Lara ... and Don Lope Díaz de Haro and Don ­Esteban de Castro and other magnates and knights who were there with him. And he commanded Don Dinis to tell them what he had requested of the king ... And after Don Dinis had spoken, King Alfonso commanded the infantes and magnates of his council to advise him accordingly. And no one said a thing and they were all silent for a long time. And the king then asked them again why they did not respond to the issue set forth by Don Dinis and the king was angry with them all but he was expressly upset with Don Nuño. And Don Nuño stood up and said: “My Lord, I refrained from giving you my advice since I considered it more appropriate that you hear first from your brothers the infantes and Don Lope Díaz de Haro and Don Esteban de Castro ... And while it is fitting that you should honor your grandson ... I can never consent to your renunciation of the tribute owed to you by the king of Portugal.” And after he had spoken, the king showed that he was not pleased with what he had said and Don Nuño took leave of the assembly and left the palace. And Infante Don Manuel and everyone who was there understood how the king was upset with what Don Nuño had to say. And Don Manuel began to speak and said to the king that the tribute owed by the king of Portugal ... to the king of León was ­insignificant and that on the other hand given the great significance of Don Dinis’s family ties that the king should therefore do much more for him and if he did not do so that it would be unjust. And the others who were there said that the king was right to give the prince what he had requested. And the king granted him what he asked for and commanded that a document be drawn up authorizing this concession.132

Ballesteros, who customarily has little good to say about Infante Manuel, closely analyses the meeting, seizing upon the occasion to brand Manuel as a selfish sycophant while extolling the virtues of Don Nuño.133 Far too often, Ballesteros, who arguably knew Alfonso X ­better than any other historian to date, allows his emotions to obscure his objectivity, looking for someone other than Alfonso to blame for the monarch’s imprudent decisions. Yet this is the same Ballesteros who shortly before the incident with Don Dinis describes the royal court in Seville where “Al frente de los nobles castellanos se destacaba Don Nuño González de Lara, que de pronto actuaría a plena luz, cuando ya hacía meses que maquinaba con sus hijos en la sombra” (426). Don Nuño, who would soon become the king’s arch-nemesis as the leader of an impending rebellion of disgruntled nobles and who was conspiring against Alfonso X with his sons “in the shadows,” now stands out as the epitome of virtue but only, we should note, in contrast to Don

122

Dawn of a Dynasty

Manuel, whom Ballesteros can never forgive for ultimately abandoning his brother in his hour of greatest need. Regrettably, this unwarranted portrait of the infante has coloured the narrative of most historians who have written about him since then, with the notable exception of his own son, Juan Manuel. This distorted portrayal cannot be sustained in light of the evidence we now possess of his life and times and given the circumstances in which he laboured, namely the often capricious and wilful actions of his older brother, who at his life’s end had alienated most of his family members and former friends and allies. In these circumstances, it might be beneficial to consider that Infante Manuel’s son Alfonso was precisely the same age as his great-nephew, Don Dinis, and that the infante might have actively promoted a close relationship between the two young boys, contemplating the possible benefits such a friendship could bring to his own son in the near future. During the first week of May, the royal court was in Jaén where, despite the continuing problems with the Algarve, Alfonso X pressed on with his efforts to effect Christian settlements in and around Murcia and to protect the land he had given to his brother Manuel, granting to the city council of Murcia on 18 May freedom to fish in both fresh and salt water with the exception of the royal albuferas or lagoons and those he had already ceded to Infante Manuel near the port of Santa Pola: “E que pesquen francamientre en aguas dulces e en la mar, s­ aluas ­nuestras alboheras e las que auemos dado al infante Don Manuel ­nuestro hermano o a otri con nuestros preuillegios.”134 The following day in Jaén, Infante Manuel confirmed a royal privilege granting the hamlet of Alguazas in the greenbelt around Murcia to the city of ­Cartagena.135 By the beginning of July, both Infante Manuel and the king had returned to Seville. Wednesday, 26 September 1267, was an important date in the life of Infante Manuel.136 On this day he entered into an agreement with ­Master Juan González and the Order of Calatrava that invested in him all property and appurtenances held by the Order in Peñafiel, thus ­consolidating earlier grants he must have obtained in the same town from Alfonso X, and creating in the process a prominent political and fiscal base of operations that would later be conveyed to his son Juan. The possessions of the Calatravans were to be transferred to Infante Manuel in life tenancy, reverting to the Order at his death: Let it be known by all who see this charter that I, Infante Don ­Manuel, son of King Fernando, declare that I have received from you, Don J­ohan ­Gonçaluez, master of the Order of Calatrava and of the religious community of that same location, everything that the aforementioned ­Order possesses within Peñafiel and its boundaries: houses, vinyards, land, ­ mills, and the usufruct of all you possess there, to have and hold for the



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

123

rest of my days. And I declare that at my death I will leave it to you and the aforementioned Order free and clear together with any improvements and amendments that I may make thereto, and that none of my heirs may be able to appropriate any of these things for any reason whatsoever. In order to render this charter more secure and so that there can be no doubt, we have therefore made two copies of the document divided by a.b.c., both of which carry our seal: one for you, Master, and the aforementioned Order, and one for me, Infante Don Manuel.137

A document from the papal chancery of Honorius III reveals that Peñafiel had originally been given by Fernando III to his wife Beatrice on 23 September 1222 as part of her dowry.138 Ballesteros believes it was a segment of certain lands previously confiscated from the Laras.139 In any case, Peñafiel was one of the first towns in Castile to receive the recently promulgated Fuero real, given by Alfonso X to the town council on 19 July 1256 during the assembly of Segovia, a privilege granted only to those u ­ rban assemblies that had gained the monarch’s full trust and confidence.140 Infante Manuel duly confirms the document. It is not known when or under what circumstances the Order of Calatrava had earlier obtained the possessions in Peñafiel it now conveyed to Infante Manuel, but Alfonso’s charter indicates that the town at this time was very much in the monarch’s political camp, as were Palencia and Burgos, which also received the Fuero real on the eighteenth and twenty-seventh of this same month. During December 1267, we have a curious reference to a visit I­ nfante Manuel’s son Alfonso paid to his uncle, Infante Pedro de Aragón, who was at that time in Barcelona. Miret i Sans, citing the Llibre de les despeses of Infante Pedro without any supporting details, remarks that “També havia tingut estatjat el seu parent D. Alfons Manuel, fill de l’infant Manuel de Castella i de Constança d’Aragó, germana de l’infant D. Pere.”141 We cannot assume that a young boy of six was travelling by himself, and the suggestion that he may have accompanied his father, Infante Manuel, is reasonable. But what were the two of them about in Barcelona during the month of December 1267? By 7 December, Manuel and his son Alfonso were in Villena, where the infante issued a charter to the Christian settlers of Elche. It is a noteworthy document that provides valuable insight into the infante’s micromanagement of this, his most important domain at the time, one that he compares to his brother’s kingdom of Seville: In the name of God, amen. Know all to whom these presents shall come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of the noble and honourable King Don Ferrando and Queen Doña Beatrice, together with my firstborn son and

124

Dawn of a Dynasty

heir, Don Alfonso, desirous of promoting and benefiting our Christian settlers of Elche, grant them and bestow upon them and confirm to them all the hereditary properties they possess within Elche and its boundaries just as I conferred them in my charters and as they were, by my orders, given to them by my partitioners Gil Garzia and Gonçaluo Ybañes and Martin ­Martines. I give and grant to them these hereditary properties lawfully free and clear to have and to hold forever and to their children and grandchildren and their heirs who will come after them to bequeath and sell and to use as collateral and to exchange and to transfer and to dispose of them as they wish and as they would do with their own property insofar as they do not sell the property for five years from the date of this privilege and only then if they do not sell to anyone outside of my domain nor that of my heirs and that the property remain forever within the boundaries of Elche. And all of the existing settlers, and those who may become settlers here in the future, must occupy and maintain their homes in my Port of Santa Pola as soon as it is constructed. And those of them who are knights must maintain horses and arms; and those who have foot soldiers shall likewise maintain them and occupy their homes in my aforementioned port. And I grant them these franchises together with the laws that my brother, King Don Alfonso, gave to the council of the noble city of Seville. I likewise grant them that in the event any legal issues may arise among the inhabitants of the town that they are empowered to resolve such matters themselves within the space of ten days, with the exception of homicide, which must be adjudicated by their liege lord. I also grant them and authorize that no government official nor merino [territorial magistrate appointed by the king] nor anyone whosoever may review or countermand them in their judgments nor in their laws nor in any other thing with the exclusion of those matters which have been brought before their liege lord or whomsoever he may have placed there in charge. I likewise grant and authorize that whenever these settlers may find themselves abroad, whether by land or by sea, that they be not required to maintain horses until their return so long as they be not absent for more than three months and should they be absent for more than three months, let them maintain horses and arms even as other citizens must do. Likewise, I grant and authorize that if perchance, God forbid, the town of Elche should be lost at some point and that I or my heirs with the help of God should recover it, that my Christian settlers who are currently here in Elche or their future heirs, shall, by dint of this my privilege, regain all their hereditary properties just as they had previously possessed them each and every one at that time and let them continue to serve me or my heirs by land or by sea those who are presently here and those who are to come even as those of the council of the noble city of Seville serve the king, Don Alfonso, my brother. And whosoever



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

125

contravenes my privilege or infringes upon it in any way, let him be cursed and excommunicated and receive the wrath of God and Holy Mary and lie in hell with Judas the traitor forevermore, amen. Furthermore, I, Infante Don Manuel, and my heirs entreat the noble King Don Alfonso, my brother, and his heirs that whosoever shall breach this contract or violate it in any way, let him pay five thousand Alfonsine gold maravedís and let me and my heirs condemn him to the extent possible and if not, may we answer to God for our failure to do so. And so that this privilege may be certain for now and evermore and never brought into doubt, I, Infante Don Manuel, commanded that my seal be affixed thereto. And I, Don ­Alfonso Manuel, confirm it and commanded that my seal be affixed thereto. This privilege was issued in Villena by order of Infante Don Manuel on Wednesday, the seventh day of December in the Era of one thousand and three hundred and five years [1267]. I, Pedro Ybáñez, servant of Infante Don Manuel, recorded this privilege by order of Lazaro Peres, scribe and notary of the aforementioned lord, Infante Don Manuel.142

By 27 January Infante Manuel was in Jerez de la Frontera, where he confirms several chancery documents.143 During the spring of 1268, from March through June, Alfonso held a general assembly in Jerez, one of the most memorable and significant legislative sessions of his reign, explicitly convened on the frontier with Granada to convey, as Ballesteros asserts, an unambiguous signal to the Muslims of Andalusia that the king was now in undisputed control of the region.144 Infante Manuel was prominently in attendance, as the monarch remarks in the written records of that assembly: “And they came to me in Xeres and I took counsel with my uncle Don Alfonso and with my brothers and with the prelates and nobles who were there.”145 The brothers to whom the monarch refers are the infantes Manuel and Felipe, since Fadrique and Enrique were out of the country and Archbishop Sancho had died seven years earlier. After confirming a charter in Jerez on 7 March, Infante Manuel left the city, travelling north to Burgos.146 There, on 5 April 1268, he wrote to the town council and government officials of Elche concerning various matters, including the issue of vezindat, the requirement that settlers maintain a house within the boundaries of the town, complaints against town officials, water rights, and taxes on uianda, articles of food, provisions, or victuals, among others: From me, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, to the council and officials of Elche, greetings to those vassals whom I love and trust. Know that I have been informed that certain settlers in Elche do not wish to

126

Dawn of a Dynasty

maintain houses in the town as do the other settlers wherefore I command that such settlers in Elche be constrained by you to maintain their houses in the town and to provide you with proof that they have done so even as do the other settlers. Likewise, I command those wardens of my ­castles that should anyone complain against their men, that they be brought before you the officials and that they may not be excused from so doing. ­Furthermore, I command that the water belonging to the council be held by all members in common and this shall apply to the water from B ­ enicanal and other places until such time as I am able to visit the town. Likewise, I command that all those who bring articles of food or provisions to my land, that they be allowed to move about freely and securely and that none be so bold as to impose upon them any tariffs whatsoever except those customarily levied before the war. Furthermore, I command that every settler from Elche be allowed to move freely within my entire domain just as they are allowed to do in Elche. Likewise, I command that every Christian from Elda be judged by the laws and officials of Elche. Furthermore, I command that the tax collectors and their representatives be judged by Don Çag my tax collector or whomsoever he may appoint in his stead. And I command that all these aforementioned matters be observed and obeyed.147

With regard to the nature of the economy of Elche during Infante ­Manuel’s administration, very little is known, but a recent in-depth study of commerce in Murcia at the end of the fifteenth century is so comprehensive that it undoubtedly includes many of the most salient agricultural and mercantile enterprises active during the thirteenth century as well.148 Manuel’s sojourn in Burgos was brief, and by 20 April he was back in Jerez, where he confirmed a royal charter.149 Two days later his brother the king despatched a directive to the alcaides or castellans of the kingdom of Murcia prohibiting them from levying an arrótova or toll on Christians for passage within the territory, and specifically in Infante Manuel’s domain of Elche: Know that the town council of Murcia sent me evidence that Christians and Moors are being charged a toll for passage through Elche and many other locations in the kingdom of Murcia. I find this to be unacceptable nor is it fair for them to do so since the land belongs to Christians. I therefore command that henceforth none be so bold as to charge either Christians or Moors a toll either in Elche or any other location in the kingdom of Murcia since the land is now untroubled and at peace.150

Had Infante Manuel given his castellans approval to levy a toll within Elche, authorization that was now being countermanded by his brother?



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

127

It would seem so, since Elche is the only town named in the despatch and certainly, given the infante’s micromanagement of his domain, no fiscal policy could have been implemented without his express sanction. Though Manuel was in Jerez at the time the communication was issued, he does not confirm the document. With the conclusion of the legislative assembly at the end of June, the royal entourage left Jerez for Seville, where Infante Manuel confirms a royal document on the twenty-eighth of that month.151 Still in Seville on 30 July, the monarch bestowed the fuero or laws of Vitoria on the settlers of Vergara in a charter from which Infante Manuel is conspicuously absent, and his whereabouts during the month of July are unknown.152 On 11 August 1268, the king found himself forced once again to address the issue of Infante Manuel’s unwarranted exactions on the ­citizens of the kingdom of Murcia. This time, however, the tone of the monarch’s message is less than cordial, indeed peremptory and even somewhat punitive in urging the town council of Alicante to retaliate against Manuel’s excessive taxation with a similar levy of their own on the inhabitants of the infante’s domain: “I have seen the communication you sent me concerning the tolls you have been charged in my brother Don Manuel’s domain. I ordered Don Manuel not to levy these charges but if henceforth they continue to tax you, I command you to levy a toll on all those who travel from the lands of Don Manuel to your town and within your boundaries and to do no other than this.”153 There had clearly been a falling out between the royal siblings over the issue of a toll tax, and Alfonso was irritated by Manuel’s unrepentant cupidity. He had advised the infante against overburdening his subjects but, in all good conscience, he himself had of late made the same excessive demands upon his own subjects and could not bring himself to discipline his brother for a similar offence beyond a mild reprimand. Manuel recognized his brother’s moral reluctance in this regard, and in spite of the king’s conciliatory attitude towards the complaint from the citizens of Elche, apparently felt no remorse about inflicting a tax on the inhabitants of Alicante. Alfonso would do nothing to stop him, and he could well afford the reciprocal taxes the town council of Alicante might impose upon the residents of his own domain. Besides, income from the few settlers who had repopulated Murcia was tight and his expenses were many and unrelenting.154 During the fall of 1268, Manuel followed the royal court to Jerez, where he confirms a document issued by his brother on 9 October.155 In the interim, he would have learned of the defeat in August of the ­Ghibelline supporters of his young cousin, Conradin of Hohenstaufen,

128

Dawn of a Dynasty

by the army of Charles of Anjou at the Battle of Tagliacozzo. By the end of October, Conradin was publicly beheaded in Naples and Manuel’s brother, Enrique, who had fought by Conradin’s side, had been captured and imprisoned in Italy, where he would spend the next twenty-three years until his release in 1291. By 3 November Manuel had travelled to Burgos, where he purchased land and homes located in Belbimbre, Fuentedueña, and S ­ arasona from the Hospital del Rey for six hundred maravedís, issuing in the process his own contract.156 In fact, the purchase seems to have been initiated and arranged by Infante Manuel’s older sister, Berenguela, a nun in the nearby Monastery of Las Huelgas, in collaboration with the commander of the hospital, Fray Domingo. Two weeks later, on 18 November, Infante Manuel returned to ­Andalusia and Córdoba, where he confirmed a chancery document as the kings “ermano ... e alférez.”157 He would remain in Córdoba ­until ­December, when he travelled to Toledo with the royal families of Castile and Aragón to witness the first mass celebrated by his b ­ rother-in-law Sancho of Aragón, recently elevated by Clement IV to replace Manuel’s late brother Sancho of Castile as primate of Spain. We know he must have travelled together with the king’s royal entourage since, according to an account of the journey by Sancho’s father, Jaime I, in the Llibre dels feits, Alfonso was accompanied by “tots los altres rics hòmens,” which most certainly would have included Infante Manuel.158 During his sojourn in Toledo, Jaime I received an embassy from the khan of the ­Mongols, Abaqa Khan, a recent convert to Christianity and a son-in-law of the emperor of Constantinople, Michael VIII Paleologus, who proposed that he and Jaime undertake a crusade against the Muslims in the Holy Land.159 The sixty-year-old king of Aragón was uncharacteristically reckless and certainly imprudent in embracing a crusade, a whimsical venture he no doubt assumed could be the crowning event of his long and illustrious career as “Jaume el Conqueridor.” The following month, in January 1269, Jaime I had left Toledo and was returning to Valencia when, he recounts, he met  Alfonso X, Gil Garcés de Azagra, the king’s mayordomo Juan García, and Infante ­Manuel in ­Ademuz, some 145 kilometres northwest of Valencia and 300 ­kilometres east of Toledo, where Alfonso X was on a hunting trip with his entourage:160 “As we were going to Ademuz, we saw his ­banner there where we had to pass. And the king was there and we greeted him and he said that he would like to speak with us and he requested that Don M ­ anuel, Don Gil Garcés, and Don Juan García might also be present.”161 Gil Garcés de Azagra was Alfonso’s most trusted and prominent partitioner in the reapportionment of Murcia, and his land holdings there far exceeded those given to either Queen Violante



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

129

or Infante Manuel.162 Gil’s daughter, Elfa de Azagra, was married to Jaime I de Xérica, the son of Jaime I and Teresa Gil de Vidaure, and in time their grandson, Jaime III de Xérica, would become the intimate friend of Infante Manuel’s son Juan Manuel, who would mention him fondly in the Conde Lucanor: “Et por que Don Jayme, sennor de Xerica, que es vno de los omnes del mundo que yo mas amo et por ventura non amo a otro tanto commo a el.”163 In Exemplo XLIIII of the Conde ­Lucanor, Juan Manuel weaves the historical figure of Gil García de ­Azagra into an elaborate fictional account in which Count Rodrigo the Frank was married to a lady, the daughter of Don Gil García de Çagra, and she was a very honourable lady and the count, her husband, falsely accused her. And she, protesting her innocence, prayed to God that if she were innocent that He might demonstrate this with a miracle and if her husband had falsely accused her that the miracle might be revealed in him. Shortly after she had finished her prayer, by a divine miracle, her husband, the count, was infected with leprosy and she left him. And when they had separated, the king of Navarre sent his envoys to the lady and married her and she became the Queen of Navarre. (2.356)164

With regard to King Jaime’s unanticipated proposal to launch a crusade in alliance with the Mongols, a romantic endeavour that might easily lead to the demise of the elderly monarch and the loss of a critical ally in Castile’s ongoing conflict with the kingdom of Granada, the response of his two sons-in-law was certainly less than enthusiastic. ­Nevertheless, Alfonso X, feeling flush with tribute he had recently ­received from the King of Granada, promptly pledged the extravagant sum of 100,000 gold morabetinos and one hundred horses in support of the mission, creating yet another source of resentment among a disgruntled Castilian nobility already overburdened by heavy assessments to fund the monarch’s increasingly unpopular imperial ambitions.165 By the first week of March, Alfonso and his retainers had arrived in Jaén, where they would reside until the beginning of May. On 17 April the king, at the urging of the town of Chinchilla, issued a proclamation to the town councils of the kingdom of Murcia, the bishopric of Cuenca, Alcaraz, and the Mudéjar aljamas of the domains of both Infante Manuel and his half-brother Infante Luis, forbidding them to enter the town boundaries of Chinchilla in order to collect cochineal or hunt without permission.166 Although the territories occupied by the Mudéjar inhabitants of Infante Manuel’s domain are not identified in the document, the lands of Infante Luis were most likely Hellín, Isso, and Minateda, which he had inherited from his mother, Jeanne de Ponthieu.167

130

Dawn of a Dynasty

From Jerez, Alfonso travelled in June to Toledo, where he would reside until early November. Meanwhile, Infante Manuel, acutely aware that his prolonged absence from Murcia had been detrimental to his subjects in the region, returned to Elche, where on 20 June he issued a charter to the town council: Know all to whom these presents shall come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Ferrando, greatly desirous of promoting and benefiting the assembly of my settlers in the village of Elche, including those who are currently there as well as those who will populate the town in the ­future, authorize the partition of the houses which was executed by Lázaro Pérez168 and Don Guerrero and Johan de Tarragona and Domingo Monzón and Arnalt Bosquet. I likewise authorize the partition of the houses and lands already executed or to be carried out in the future by my partitioners Gonçaluo Yuannes and Martín Martínez and Domingo Pérez, that they and their children and their grandchildren and all those heirs who issue from them may have and hold in perpetuity, with the exception of any who may refuse to settle the land even as I have ordered, in which case I command that Gil Garçia, my castellan in Elche, and Gonçaluo Yuannes and Martín Martínez and Domingo Pérez, my partitioners, take away their holdings and give them to others to resettle. I also authorize them to use the water with which they irrigate farms on their land, even as it was formerly used by the Moors. I also authorize that the produce stands which the farmers have within the village and the butcher shops and fish market may belong to them free and clear and with the ençienso [head tax]169 and franchises which my brother King Alfonso gave to Murcia and its ­Christian settlers. I also authorize that those laws and franchises which I gave to the Christians who used to live in the outskirts of town may govern them even as it states in the privilege which they have from me until such time as I may come there and then I will meet with them and will consent to whatsoever things I see that may be to our mutual advantage. And so that there may be no doubt as to my intentions, I commanded you to present this charter with my pendant seal. Given in Elche, Thursday, the twentieth day of June, Era of one thousand three hundred and seven years [1269].170

Meanwhile in Toledo, Alfonso X was increasingly concerned with events in Castile, which now required his presence in that region, and much of the rest of the year was filled with diplomatic negotiations and final arrangements for a royal wedding to be celebrated later that fall in Burgos. The marriage of the heir apparent, Infante Fernando de la Cerda, and Blanche, daughter of Louis IX of France, was celebrated on 30 November with all the pomp and circumstance befitting such



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

131

an occasion. The affair, including the knighting of Alfonso’s nephew Prince Edward of England and numerous other young nobles, was duly attended by Infante Manuel, who had returned from Murcia for the event as recorded in the CAX, which provides a detailed account of the royal visitors from the courts of Aragon and Castile.171 Unfortunately for Alfonso X, the ceremony and accompanying festivities generated enormous expenses for the crown, which, when combined with the ever-pressing need for revenue to finance his imperial aspirations, would ultimately force him to increase taxes in an effort to cover the resulting budget deficit.172 The Crónica leaves no doubt as to the profligate outlays sustained by the king at this juncture: “Following the wedding and the ceremonies of knighthood, the guests remained in the city of Burgos for the greater part of the year during which time King Alfonso incurred great expense in providing food, clothing, horses, and many other things for all the guests of the realm, dispensing freely of his possessions to all those who came from beyond the kingdom at such time as they were ready to return home.”173 Coincidently, the king took the opportunity provided by the convergence of nobles, prelates, and members of the third estate to summon the cortes in Burgos, which took place immediately following the wedding ceremony during the first three weeks of December.174 The Crónica relates that many of the disgruntled nobles, led by the king’s boyhood friend Nuño González de Lara and the perennial malcontent Lope Díaz de Haro, also took advantage of the occasion to conspire against Alfonso, and such was the extent and recklessness of their enterprise that Nuño González even dared to believe that he might somehow persuade Alfonso’s father-in-law, Jaime I of Aragon, to side with the dissenters. Jaime adroitly evaded the issue, all the while cognizant of the very real dangers that now loomed on Alfonso’s political horizon.175 At this point, Alfonso X was sufficiently concerned by the increasing threat of a possible insurrection that he spent a number of days seeking the counsel and advice of his father-in-law, even accompanying him on his return journey to Aragon as far as Tarazona during the C ­ hristmas ­holidays from 20 to 26 December.176 During the seven days Alfonso spent with his father-in-law, Jaime tells us in the Llibre dels feits that he offered the Castilian seven bits of advice, one of which is of particular importance for our own estimation of Manuel’s physical presence during the next six months, from January to July 1270. On the fifth day, Jaime counselled his son-in-law as follows: God had given him Murcia and we, with the help of Our Lord, had ­assisted him to gain and conquer it; and that the grants we had made

132

Dawn of a Dynasty

to the settlers of Murcia and those he himself had made afterwards had not been respected and that, on the contrary, the agreements had been broken and their land had been taken from them; and they were given twenty or thirty tafullas177 and he who received the most had been given only fifty and fifty tafullas were only two jovadas178 as measured in Valencia and these were only twelve cafices of seed corn179 as measured in Murcia, the best town in Andalusia except for Seville. And he was very wrong to let people say that he and his men did not know how to partition land among the settlers, and that Murcia would never prosper unless he did one thing: “That is that you should settle there one hundred good men who, whenever you come to the city, will receive you properly and they must have adequate inheritances because neither one hundred tafullas nor two hundred can be considered sufficient for a man of importance. And as for the rest of the land, leave it to artisans and workmen and in this way you will have a prosperous town. And if you have given land to men who do not reside in Murcia, come to an agreement with them and give their land to settlers.”180

With a suspicion of rebellion on the horizon in Castile, Alfonso X could ill afford to ignore his father-in-law’s warning and thereby risk dissension in the kingdom of Murcia at a time when he would urgently need to count on the support of his feudal retainers there. In this immediate context, who better to attend to these pressing matters than his alférez, Infante Manuel, whose own lands and interests lay precisely in that same region. The Llibre dels feits relates that a few days after leaving Tarazona on the return trip to Castile, Alfonso fell gravely ill in Fitero de Navarra. Jaime turned back to meet him there, bringing with him his own physician, Mestre Ioan, and staying with him several days until he was well enough to travel. According to Jaime, Alfonso “was gravely ill, laid up in bed by a blow from a horse which he had received in Burgos.”181 By the end of January, the king was apparently well enough to undertake the return trip to Burgos, where he had left much unfinished business engendered by the cortes he had convoked there in early December and the more pressing matter of a possible insurrection among the nobility. On 27 January, the king travelled as far as Logroño, where he issued a charter to the town council of Elche authorizing its members to govern themselves by the laws and franchises of Murcia.182 Circumstantial evidence implies that Infante Manuel must have been with his brother during these unsettling events, since in the midst of the monarch’s convalescence such a dispensation favouring Elche would most likely have been initiated by the very person who stood to benefit most from it, the liege lord of the town, Infante Manuel. Chancery documents indicate



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

133

that Alfonso was in Logroño until 11 February, travelling from there to Santo Domingo de la Calzada and arriving in Burgos about 7 March, where he remained until the end of August. Although there are no concrete references to cortes held during March to August, Ballesteros is convinced by the nature of the documents despatched during this interval that the king was actively involved with legislative matters that he had earlier postponed following the brief cortes held in Burgos in December. González Jiménez, however, offers persuasive arguments to the contrary, and I am inclined to accept his opinion.183 From January to June 1270, we have a number of royal writs issued by the chancery, but very few publications provide us with more than a summary of the contents of these documents, and even fewer list the signatories themselves. To date, we have only one document confirmed by Infante Manuel, in Burgos on 19 May, but it is significant that another, similar royal charter published that same day in Burgos is not confirmed by him.184 Given the scarce and conflicting data that might indicate Infante Manuel was in Burgos with his brother during these dates, I am reluctant to place him there, especially given Jaime’s sage advice concerning the critical nature of the Christian settlers in M ­ urcia who had complained to the king of Aragon and were openly dissatisfied with the inheritance they had received from Alfonso X. From 27 June to 6 July, Infante Manuel dispensed five privileges in Elche and Villena, which provide us with a clear indication of his activities during that time in the Tierra de Don Manuel and lead us to believe that he was most likely despatched to that region by his brother sometime in early February, soon after the king’s convalescence in Fitero de Navarra. On 27 June Infante Manuel, following a custom recently established by his father-in-law Jaime I, donated land in Elche to the newly established Order of the Brothers of Ransom or Mercedarians, created in 1218 by San Pedro Nolasco to redeem captive Christians held by the Moors.185 Because the Order of Merced or Mercy had first been consecrated over the tomb of Santa Olalla in the Barcelona convent of the same name, which also became the seat of the Order and its first ­hospital, the confraternity was correspondingly known as the Friars of Saint Eulalia. In Elche, the hospital convent was to be built near the city walls by the gate and guard tower of Calahorra that opened on the road to Alicante. The baths, known as the baños árabes, are still to be found in the basement of what is today the Mercedarian convent of Santa Lucía in Elche. The friars represented just the type of Christian settlers most desired by the crowns of Aragón and Castile: colonists who were dedicated to creating a permanent settlement in Murcia that would ultimately contribute to the welfare of its inhabitants and the stability of its economy.

134

Dawn of a Dynasty

A week after his endowment of the Moorish baths, Infante Manuel was in Villena, where he issued another charter bestowing water rights upon the town council of Elche.186 That very same day, Friday, Manuel reconfirmed for the town council of Elche the writ issued by his brother Alfonso X earlier that year, in Logroño on 27 January: “Know all to whom these presents shall come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Fernando, greatly desirous of promoting and benefiting the town council of Elche, give and confirm and authorize them to govern themselves by the laws and franchises which my brother, the noble king Don Alfonso, gave to the town council of Murcia.”187 The following day, Saturday, Manuel continued to offer his personal assurances to Elche, reconfirming hereditary grants and privileges previously assigned by his partitioners: “I reconfirm to the town council of Elche and to those who are currently here and to those who will come in the ­future, that the houses and hereditary lands which my partitioners gave them and will give them by my command, that they may have them to hold forever, settling the town and maintaining their residence here as I have ordered.”188 On Sunday, 6 July 1270, Infante Manuel granted to the town of Villena the fuero or laws of Murcia and Elche in a document that was formerly held in the Municipal Archive of Villena but is now lost.189 Though these last three documents merely reconfirm previous charters given by Alfonso and Manuel, it seems clear that the infante was reacting to the the recently revealed concerns voiced by Jaime I, that the settlers of Murcia were unhappy with their circumstances and that serious efforts must now be undertaken to resolve these problems in order to maintain Murcia as an ally should the rumours of a rebellion in Castile prove to be true. By the middle of the summer, Infante Manuel was back in Burgos with the royal entourage, where he confirmed a privilege on 26 July.190 On 26 September, he travelled with the court to Vitoria, where he endorsed a charter granting a fair to Lorca.191 Ballesteros suspects the king may have lingered in Vitoria to better observe the increasingly suspicious activities of Lope Díaz de Haro and perhaps to continue to attend to the remainder of the business generated by the cortes held earlier in Burgos during the first half of the year.192 González Jiménez, however, believes that the monarch was most likely motivated by the absence of Thibault II of Navarre, who had accompanied Louis IX of France on the Eighth Crusade against the city of Tunis, where the French sovereign died of dysentery in August. Anticipating that the same fate might well befall Thibault and that he could profit from the resulting political turmoil in Navarre, Alfonso X remained in close proximity to Pamplona.193



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

135

Departing Vitoria in early November before learning of the demise of Thibault II, which news came to him a month later, the king now embarked upon a leisurely, protracted journey that would take him to León, Burgos, Guadalajara, Cuenca, and ultimately to his final destination in Murcia, where he would arrive a full three months later on 5 February 1271. Rightfully mistrustful of the recalcitrant nobles in C ­ astile, he had proposed to leave the young prince Fernando de la Cerda in charge of dispensing justice in the region while he himself now turned to focus on the discontent that continued to gather force among the ­Christian settlers and Mudéjar inhabitants in the kingdom of Murcia. This, then, would constitute an important period corresponding to the fourth phase of the partition of the kingdom. That Infante Manuel remained with his brother and the royal cortege throughtout this extended trip is corroborated by a document he confirms in Vitoria on 29 October194 and another in Guadalajara on 28 December.195 In the meantime, a singular event had transpired in North ­Africa, where Infante Fadrique had resided for some years at the court of Mohammed I al-Mustansir, sultan of Tunis, a ruler whose throne ­ ­Fadrique supported with a band of mercenary Castilian knights who had joined him there in exile. In July 1270 the infante’s cousin, King Louis IX of France, having launched a crusade against the Muslims in the Holy Land, had been persuaded by his brother Charles of Anjou, king of ­Sicily, to first attack Tunis, where, as noted above, the French monarch died unexpectedly of cholera a month later. Charles, joined by Prince Edward of England and King Thibault II of Navarre, soon found himself in an untenable position with insufficient supplies, surrounded by enemy forces, including those of his cousin Fadrique, and compelled to negotiate a truce with al-Mustansir. The terms of the treaty were at once favourable to Charles and unfavorable to Fadrique, as we are ­informed by the contemporary Annales Placentini Gibellini.196 Following the truce, Charles would demand that al-Mustansir disband the coterie of ­Castilian mercenaries who had been a constant source of unrest with their frequent incursions in Sicily, and in due time Fadrique was obliged to return to Castile, where he would conspire with the recalcitrant ­nobles in April 1272. With regard to the foregoing events, the CAX is unusually inaccurate: “Et el rey partió de Seuilla para yr al reyno de Murçia, e fue con él el infante Don Fadrique. E fincaron en Seuilla el infante Don ­Ferrando e el infante Don Manuel” (19.59). Between the time he set out from Vitoria in November 1270 and his arrival in Murcia during ­February 1271, the king had not visited Seville, nor had Infante Manuel remained there with Fadrique, who would not arrive back in Castile until

136

Dawn of a Dynasty

February 1272. In fact, Infante Manuel would continue in the kingdom of Murcia from February 1271 to at least May 1272, while the sovereign would only leave there in June 1272 when he departed for Alcaraz. Most of the documents we possess from this period reveal the monarch involved in adjudicating or adjusting the results of the fourth partition of Murcia from 1269 to 1270 and the fifth phase, which began in 1272.197 In the meantime the recalcitrant nobles, emboldened by the king’s absence in Castile and the recent demise of Thibault II, whose brother, Henry I, now reigned in Navarre and was thought to be amenable to their enterprise, openly convened in Lerma during February 1271 to air their grievances with Alfonso, subsequently despatching emissaries to both Navarre and the sultan of Granada in search of support for their proximate rebellion.198 The king was not unaware of the gathering storm, and shortly after his arrival in Murcia acceded to an invitation by his father-in-law Jaime I to visit Valencia, where the two met and discussed the impending rebellion of the nobles and the constant threat posed to the region by the sultan of Granada.199 Given Infante Manuel’s close ties to the Aragonese court and his own prolonged presence in the kingdom of Murcia, it is reasonable to suppose that he accompanied his brother on this trip. On 30 April, Manuel was with Alfonso in Murcia, where he confirmed a document in which the king granted various concessions to the merchants of that city.200 By 4 May, however, Alfonso found himself embroiled in a dispute that had arisen among the inhabitants of ­Alicante, who petitioned him for relief after they had been prevented by Infante Manuel from purchasing provisions in Elche. Instead of issuing a peremptory decree, however, the king, displaying unusual deference towards his brother, was ultimately able to convince him of the propriety of permitting his neighbours to obtain supplies in Elche: Don Alfonso, king of Castile by the grace of God, etc. To the town councils and alguaziles [officials] and other aportellados [municipal magistrates] of Elche and of the lands of Don Manuel which he obtained in the conquest of Murcia, salutations. Be advised that the residents of Alicante, your neighbours, have informed me that you refuse to allow them to purchase provisions in any of your towns and request that I command that you do so. And I conferred with my brother, Infante Don Manuel, concerning this matter and requested him to order you to afford them the opportunity to purchase and sell supplies in your towns in return for their money as long as your own citizens were provided for first and he granted me this favour. Therefore, I command that henceforth you allow them to purchase and sell with their money any and all provisions within your towns and



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

137

that you allow them to take such provisions to their own town because they have but little arable land to grow food. And do no other than that which I command and you will serve me well, for I have also commanded them to allow you to purchase whatsoever you will in their town and to take these purchases back with you to your own towns.201

On 18 July, Alfonso X wrote to the town council of Murcia enjoining them to cease the production of linen and hemp in the Segura River, a process that polluted the water for the inhabitants of Orihuela downstream. In this same injunction, the king inserts: “And in this regard, I command the merino, whomever he may be in the kingdom of Murcia, that he comply with my wishes or answer to me for failure to do so.”202 The last merino of record in the kingdom of Murcia, García Suárez, had been replaced on 13 September 1258 by Alfonso García de Villamayor, adelantado mayor, and for thirteen years no merino had since been appointed. In fact, scarcely two days later, on 20 July, Alfonso granted to the town of Orihuela the fuero or laws of Alicante, a document confirmed by “Don Felip, Don Loys ... Don Alffonsso Garçia, adelantado maior de tierra de Murçia et del Andaluzia ... El iffante Don Manuel, ermano del rey e su alferez ... El iffante Don Ferrando, filio mayor del rey e su mayordomo.”203 Under the current circumstances, Alfonso continued to rely on his adelantado Alfonso García while recognizing the need for a merino to ensure the appropriate administration of justice in the territory, perhaps now more so than ever because of the immediacy of maintaining law and order in the kingdom of Murcia at a time when the nobles of Castile were clearly scheming against him with the connivance of the King of Granada. In this same regard, B ­ allesteros remarks that for some unknown reason, the king had by this time ­suppressed the office of adelantado everywhere but in Galicia with Esteban ­Fernández de Castro and in Murcia with Alfonso García, reflecting once again the great uncertainty of the situation.204 At the same time, given the profusion and resultant confusion of taxes and exemptions granted by the king to the several towns and villages of the kingdom of Murcia during these years, condemnation of Infante Manuel’s conduct in this regard is hardly warranted.205 Many of the ongoing disputes that occasionally arose among the Christian settlers and Mudéjars in Murcia were directly related to Alfonso’s own erratic fiscal policy of bestowing favours upon one group of subjects while simultaneously granting exemptions from these policies to others within the kingdom.206 Nevertheless, the two brothers were keenly aware of the ­obligation both to placate the inhabitants of Murcia and to promote sound ­economic strategies at this time. In that same vein, Infante Manuel

138

Dawn of a Dynasty

issued a privilege on 10 August to the Mudéjars of Elche that directly reflects his recent, more benevolent attitude towards his Muslim vassals: Know all to whom these presents shall come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of king Don Ferrando, in order to favour and support my Moors in Elche and its confines and that their needs may be better known and that they may live in peace, I deem it prudent and command that henceforth none may be so bold as to oppose or hinder anything having to do with their customs which I have authorized in my charters to them and that in all legal matters dealing with suits brought by Christians or Jews against Moors, that they be adjudicated by a Moorish judge according to their laws except in the case of tax rights which I deem must be adjudged by my own tax collector. Likewise, I command that the Moors may not seek judgment in those suits which they bring against themselves and their property in any court other than that of their own Moorish magistrate. Likewise, all Moors who stand accused must be held in custody or released on bail ­according to the accusations brought against them and let the case by heard by their magistrate and judged according to their own laws and if it be proven that the complainant has knowingly made a false accusation, I declare that he must be punished according to his own law. I command that all Moors held prisoner be confined in the Moorish jail and that they be guarded by the char medina [Ar. s∙āh∙ib al-madīna, or local magistrate functioning as chief of police].207 I also command that no other fines be levied against the Moors except those penalties necessary to protect my rights.208

Towards the end of August, Murcia would be witness to yet another attempt by the Castilian monarch to consolidate his claims to the evanescent dream of empire. Alfonso would marry his second daughter, seventeen-year-old Beatrice, to the twenty-seven-year-old William VII, marquess of Montferrat, who was not, as Ballesteros asserts, an ­“hombre ya maduro que le llevaba muchos años de edad.”209 The ­marquess had renounced his allegiance to Charles of Anjou and was commited to rallying support for the Castilian in Lombardy. He had arrived towards the end of the month in Murcia, where the wedding was duly celebrated several days later. On 20 August, Alfonso issued a privilege to the town of Lorca granting it the fuero or laws of Córdoba that is confirmed by Infante Felipe, though neither Infante Manuel nor Crown Prince Fernando de la Cerda endorsed the document.210 Nevertheless, Manuel reappears several days later when he confirms a royal charter in Murcia on 9 September.211 On 18 October, William of Montferrat contracted with Alfonso X to marry his daughter, Marguerite, to the king’s youngest son, Infante



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

139

Juan, pledging to recognize the boy as his heir should he and Beatrice fail to have a son, though should he father a successor, he would compensate his daughter Marguerite with a dowry of twenty thousand marks of silver. The contract was duly signed in the presence of “Don Emanuello, fratello del predetto Re.”212 Three days later, Manuel endorsed the king’s confirmation of property the infante had previously ceded to his vassal, the poet Pedro Gómez Barroso, on 18 December 1266.213 Though Infante Manuel does not confirm all of the documents issued by the royal chancery during the fall of 1271, there is no e­ vidence that he had left the kingdom of Murcia. He was absent on 5 ­November214 but present again two weeks later.215 The new year 1272 found Alfonso X and Manuel still in Murcia where, on 14 January, the infante endorsed a royal document in which the king promised to cede to the Order of Calatrava the town of Alcalá de Abenzaide at such time as it might be conquered from the Moors.216 On 8  February, Infante Manuel, pursuant to the initial activities involved in the fifth phase of the partition, issued a charter granting to Elche the laws and privileges of the town of Murcia: Know all to whom these presents shall come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of the very noble king Don Ferrando and of Queen Doña Beatriz, together with my son and heir, Don Alfonso, greatly desirous of promoting and benefiting the town council of Elche, together with those who are currently inhabitants as well as those who will be so in the future, grant them and bestow upon them for now and ever more all the laws and franchises that my brother, the very noble king Don Alfonso, gave and will give to the city of Murcia together with its privileges and charters. And we command and decree that none should be so bold as to contravene this our privilege by breaching it or by infringing upon it in any way, for any who would do so will incur our displeasure and will be fined three thousand maravedís plus double the damages to be paid to the town council. And in order that this may be certain and without doubt, we command that this privilege be sealed with our seal and we authorize it and confirm it. And I, the aforesaid Don Alfonso, authorize this privilege and confirm it and place thereon in testimony my seal ... in Elche on the eighth day of ­February, in the Era of 1310 [1272]. I, Per Ybáñez, transcribed this.217

Two weeks later, Infante Manuel confirmed a charter issued by ­ lfonso X bestowing on the village of Ves the laws of Cuenca.218 By the A end of February, Infante Fadrique had returned to Spain after a hiatus of nearly twelve years, during which time he had made his fortune as a mercenary in Sicily and Tunis.219 His presence at the royal court in

140

Dawn of a Dynasty

Murcia coincides precisely with those months immediately preceding the rebellion of the nobles, and it would be naive to suppose that he had nothing to do with the outbreak of hostilities between Alfonso X and the recalcitrant barons shortly thereafter. The king must have realized this when two weeks later, on 14 March, he issued a document to the Cathedral of Seville, confirmed by Infante Manuel, ceding to the church council the alquería of Gelves in exchange for Solúcar Albayda and Brenes “which we gave to our brother, Infante Fadrique.”220 Ortiz de Zúñiga astutely presumes that this was a calculated stratagem to engage Fadrique’s loyalty and divert him from any clandestine support he might have for his rebellious brother Infante Felipe.221 During the month of March 1272, the Repartimiento de Murcia highlights a noteworthy judicial proceeding convened by the sovereign to ascertain whether or not certain knights and other landholders in ­Murcia had, in fact, established vezindat or legal residence and were therefore entitled to retain their land grants or, on the contrary, had been absentes in which case their land could be confiscated and reassigned to other Christian settlers. The success of Christian resettlement in the conquered territories of the kingdom of Murcia, even as in ­Seville, was highly dependent on the continued cultivation of scarce arable land, and confiscation and reassignment were common. The law initially required property owners to settle the land for five years before they could sell or exchange it, though many of them were members of the royal court and thus able to petition the king to grant them a waiver of vezindat. The text of the Repartimiento sets forth in great detail the case of a certain Ladrón, a vassal of Infante Manuel, who had been found in violation of the provision to be physically present on the land he had received and had subsequently appealed to the sovereign.222 It is significant that each of the witnesses in the case is repeatedly asked if they know that Ladrón is a vassal of Infante Manuel, leading us to suspect that Manuel had a reputation for actively intervening on behalf of his retainers: Sunday, the seventh day of March, the king being present in Murcia, commanded to come before him those knights and other absent tenants, together with the jurados [sworn municipal magistrates working under the direction of the alcalde] of the districts who had judged these individuals to be absent, and based on the libro de los jurados [the book or register into which the jurados entered their judgments], determined that Ladrón was absent and pursuant to this, Ladrón requested an audience with the king and the king granted it. And Ladrón declared that the jurados should not have pronounced him absent because he had and continued to have here



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

141

his own horse and arms, and the jurados said that he did not and had no more than a single foot soldier; and the king then commanded that García Domínguez, his notary, and Fortuín Sánchez and Ponz Carbonel, judicial magistrates, and Andreo Dodana investigate the truth of the matter, if it were, in fact, as Ladrón had maintained; and they did as they were ordered. And they investigated and interrogated reliable witnesses who had knowledge of the subject and they were: Johan de Tormón, a settler in Santa María, when sworn and questioned concerning the matter, declared that the property held by Ladrón in M ­ urcia was adequately cultivated, both the land purchased from the Moors as well as that received by Christians in the partition carried out by Don Gil [Garcés de Azagra, the most prominent of the three royal partitioners of Murcia designated by the king223]. And that ever since he received the partitioned land from Don Gil, that he had a foot soldier there for at least a year until now, that he sent here during the first week of Lent ­Fortuín García, and Martín Ruiz and Diego, a first cousin of Ladrón, together with two other men who brought a horse and a mule carrying Ladrón’s arms and ten azconas munteras [short lances, javelins224], 12 alauesas [short lances225], and 4 crossbows with their bolts, and chain mail barding for his horse; and he had that horse here up until yesterday, Saturday, when he sent it off to be with Don Manuel, but he claims that he left there in its place another, white horse. And he also declared that before he sent his horse and arms here, that he rented the larger houses to a Jew who payed each month two besantes226 and three almadraques227 with other bedclothes until Ladrón returned. And he said that when the jurados of the districts were carrying out their inquiry, that the aforesaid servants of Ladrón were living in Ladrón’s houses and had there with them these arms. Asked if he knew that Ladrón was a vassal of Don Manuel at the time he received this property and ever since then, he says he believes so. Vicente Ybáñez, jurado of the district of Sant Bartholomé, one of the four jurados who undertook the survey, was a neighbour of Ladrón’s and when asked, states, just as did Johan de Tormón, that the property was adequately cultivated, and says that he knows that Ladrón did not have in his houses any other than his foot soldier, Johan Pérez, and that Johan Pérez was living in the larger houses. And that a Jew rented and occupied the other houses. And he says that he does not know what other men or arms he might have had there, but that he saw and heard that he had his own azconas there though he does not know how many. And when he went to these houses with Johan García and with the jurados who were carrying out the survey, he found no other servant of Ladrón’s there but this Johan Pérez. And that neither this Johan Pérez nor anyone else told them that Ladrón had there either a horse or arms, nor was Ladrón there because he

142

Dawn of a Dynasty

was with Don Manuel, though he saw there Lope de Mendoça and that he did not know if he had there either horse or arms. Asked if he knew that he was a vassal of Don Manuel, he states that he had heard so; asked whom he had heard it from, he states that from many people. Don Martín de Caparroso, a farmer and settler in Sancta María who lived in front of Ladrón’s houses, duly sworn and questioned, states that he remembers that for the last eight months Ladrón had in his houses up to six men whose names he does not know. And that during this same time, he had a horse and up to twelve azconas, and that before this he does not recall that Ladrón had any other there except Johan Pérez, his foot soldier, in some of the houses and a Jew who lived in the others, and that he does not know if the Jew was renting there or not. Asked if he knows that Ladrón is a vassal of Don Manuel, he states that he has heard so. Pasqual de Caparroso, a settler in Sancta María who lives in front of Ladrón’s houses, duly sworn and questioned, states that he always saw that Ladrón left his foot soldier Johan Pérez here in his houses and that other men came and went but that for the last year no others remained there except this one and that a short time before the king arrived, Ladrón had sent here a horse and arms and twelve azconas and tragacetes228 and crossbows and up to five men. And that he was renting several houses to a Jew, and that Johan Pérez lived in the others and that he saw Lope de Mendoça living in these houses together with his men and other knights. Domingo Pérez, a miller and settler in Sant Bartolomé, who lives in front of Ladrón’s houses, duly sworn and questioned, states with regard to whether the land was properly cultivated, that he knows nothing about this but that he saw, up until the time the king arrived, that Ladrón had no one living in his houses except Johan Pérez, his foot soldier. And also a Moorish woman converted to Christianity called Aldonça who lived in a little room of the rented houses. And around the first of January, before the king arrived, he states that he saw Ladrón send here a horse and arms and two mules and eleven azconas. And that he does not know if the animals belonged to him, but that he sees Ladrón riding that horse at this time. Asked if he knows that Ladrón is a vassal of Don Manuel, he states that he does not know.229

Though the king’s verdict is not registered in the text, Ladrón must have lost the appeal since the Repartimiento states elsewhere that “the inheritance of those found absent was given and distributed in the following manner: ... Of the 33 alfabas230 belonging to Ladrón which he held in Alfarella and in Beniçot and in Turbidal, and the 7 alfabas belonging to Remón de Puch Ferrer which he held in Cudiaçibit, 20 ­alfabas were given to Arnalt de Tarasco and 20 alfabas to Michel de Relat” (219–20). It



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

143

is noteworthy that Infante Manuel’s landholdings, granted in the fifth partition of Murcia in 1272, were also located in “Alffarella” where he was gifted with sixty-three alfabas. Immediately preceding the matter of Ladrón’s appeal on 7 March 1272, the R ­ epartimiento states that Manuel’s son, Alfonso, was granted “10 alfabas, excluding the other 10 alfabas that are to be given to him from land left over in the rahal of ­Axarqui” (226).231 Other feudal retainers of Infante ­Manuel also ­received benefices in the partition of Murcia, specifically: Iohan Pérez, escrivano or secretary of Don Manuel, seventeen alfabas in Cudiaçibit (2, 223); Domingo Pérez, Don Manuel’s foot soldier, three alfabas in V ­ illanueva (101); Pero ­Johan, a vassal of Don Manuel’s, twenty alfabas in Villanueva, Beniçot, and Carabixa (221–2); Felipe, brother of Pero ­Johan, fifteen alfabas (222). Within this same time frame during 1270–72 we must also include a series of land grants registered in the Repartimiento de Lorca and bestowed on Pedro Jiménez de Calasanz, the scion of a noble Aragonese ­family of Navarrese origins, who received properties in the quadriellas or squadrons of “Don Navarro” (19), “­ Mateo Martínez” (20), “Domingo Iniesta” (23), “Sancho de la Plaza” (42), and “Don Rovera,” where it is specifically recorded that he acquired a c­avallería given to him by Don Manuel.232 The appellant, Ladrón, was clearly a man of some stature at court since the Repartimiento de Murcia refers to him as a caballero mayor, one of those who received twenty alfabas together with Jacobo de las Leyes, juez del Rey, or the king’s magistrate; Rodrigo Porcell, almojarife mayor del reino de Murcia, the royal tax collector for the kingdom of Murcia; Pero Gonçaluez, the king’s secretary; and Ferrant Gonçaluo, the queen’s cup bearer. In fact, Ladrón was a member of the noble Basque family of the lords of Oñate and a relative of Doña Toda Ladrón, mother of Alfonso’s chief partitioner of Murcia, Gil Garcés de Azagra II.233 Infante Manuel’s connection with Ladrón is indicative of the strong feudal relationships that had developed over the years between the vassals of the king of Castile and those of his father-in-law, Jaime I of Aragón, following the marriage of Violante to Alfonso in 1249. Despite their many and frequent differences over the years, the two monarchs had never waivered in their recognition of the need for an aggressive and consistent policy of Christian resettlement in Valencia and Murcia, and their feudal retainers in the region, as the recipients of numerous gifts and land grants, served both sovereigns equally. Characteristic of this fluid feudal allegiance was the appointment of the Aragonese Gil Garcés de Azagra II as one of the three major partitioners of Murcia. Torres Fontes remarks that in this regard “Cuando Alfonso el Sabio dispuso la partición de la huerta y campo de Murcia, la personalidad

144

Dawn of a Dynasty

de Don Gil se agiganta y destaca por encima de todos los habitantes del reino, incluso en plano superior al Obispo y al Adelantado.”234 Don Gil’s father, Gil Garcés I de Azagra, was married to Doña Toda Ladrón and was a relative of Doña Teresa Gil de Vidaure, third wife of King Jaime I of Aragón. Their son, Jaime I de Xérica, married Elfa de ­Azagra, and their grandson, Jaime III de Xérica, was said by Juan Manuel in the Conde Lucanor to be “vno de los omnes del mundo que yo mas amo” (2.439), a friendship inherited from his father, Infante Manuel, who, as the husband of Constanza de Aragón, was the brother-in-law of Jaime I de Xérica. Juan Manuel would further strengthen this close relationship with Aragón by his first two marriages: to Isabel, daughter of Jaime II de Mallorca, in 1299 and then to Constanza, daughter of Jaime II de Aragón, in 1312. Clearly, the intimate familial and political ties that bound Alfonso X and Infante Manuel to the court of Aragón and to each other were an affinity not shared by their siblings Fadrique and Felipe, who were more inclined to support the disaffected nobility of Castile-León. The principal instigators among the recalcitrant nobles, who as we have seen had openly convened in Lerma to air their grievances against Alfonso X for the first time during February 1271, included Nuño González de Lara, Lope Díaz de Haro, Esteban Fernández de Castro, and Infante Felipe, who was now joined in the conspiracy by his brother-in-law, Ferrán Ruiz de Castro, and Simón Ruiz de los C ­ ameros, who would marry Infante Fadrique’s daughter, Beatrice, sometime between 1272 and 1277.235 For over a year, the conspirators had made n ­ umerous attempts to consolidate their opposition to ­Alfonso X through various alliances among themselves and with the King of Navarre, the sultan of Granada, and the Marinids of Morocco but with only limited success. Several events at this time, however, intensified their determination to move forward with all haste. Pope Gregory X, notified of his election to the papal see in November 1271 while on Crusade in the Holy Land, had returned to Rome where he was duly consecrated on 27  March 1272 (Fig. 23). One of his first official acts was to convoke an ecumenical council in Lyon, France, for May 1274, where he would attempt to resolve the matter of the Holy Roman Empire and redirect the efforts of the church towards a new campaign against the Saracens. Less than a week later, on 2 April, the death of Richard of Cornwall, ­Alfonso’s only serious rival for the imperial crown, gave the king of Castile renewed hope that he might soon have within his grasp the prize he had coveted for so many years. The conspirators realized that now, more than ever, the monarch would need their support for his plans to attend the ­Council of Lyon and that the time was ripe for them to press



Murcia and the “Tierra de Don Manuel”: 1260–72

145

forward with their demands. Spurred on by his larger imperial illusions, ­Alfonso X would soon leave the pleasant confines of Murcia to seek his higher destiny abroad, but first he had to attend to unfinished business in the region. Chancery documents during April 1272 project a sense of unity among the king and his brothers that masked the reality of the significant divisions among them. On 8 and 9 April, Alfonso X issued consecutive decrees to the town council of Murcia confirmed by “Don Fredric ... Don Felipp ... El infante Don Manuel, ermano del rey e su alferez,”236 and another document on 18 April to the bishopric of Cartagena with the same fraternal signatories.237 A royal privilege of 28 April issued to the Christian settlers of Murcia and confirmed by “D. Fedrich ... D. Phelip,” though not by ­Manuel, refers to the concession of fishing rights in the Albufera near Cabo de Palos within Infante Manuel’s domain: “And let them take as much earth as they wish for bricks, for roof tiles, and for walls, and let them fish freely in fresh water and in the ocean, except in our lagoons and in those which we have given to our brother, Infante Don Manuel.”238 The same text also decrees: “We authorize and mandate that if any document of ours be presented to Murcia which goes against the laws and franchises which we have given here, that we may be made aware of it and that in the meantime our Adelantado, or whoever may be in charge in his stead, will fulfil all that we have commanded.”239 Though the ­office of adelantado de Murcia had been held by Enrique Pérez de Harana since 26 November 1270, we have a document from 5 November 1271 in which Alfonso García confirms as “Adelantado mayor de tierra de Murcia e de la Andalucia.”240 The sovereign’s hesitation concerning the incumbent at this juncture is indicative of the growing confusion generated by his desire to leave the kingdom of Murcia and attend to other, more urgent affairs before having resolved the matter of adequate governance in the region. It also suggests that the king was not planning on leaving either Infante Manuel or his son, Fernando, in charge of Murcia, and that the plan was to have both of them accompany him on his return to Castile. Alfonso X had apparently settled the issue by 12 June, when he wrote to Enrique Pérez de Harana concerning an inheritance claim he commanded him to investigate in the kingdom of Murcia and addressing him in the letter as his adelantado.241 During the spring of 1272, Infante Manuel’s activities were certainly not limited to matters of administration of his demesne. It is most likely to this period that we can attribute an interesting parenthesis provided by his son Juan Manuel, who relates in the Libro de la caza that he was told by his cousin Infante Juan, Infante Manuel’s nephew who was about the same age as Manuel’s first son, Alfonso Manuel, that father

146

Dawn of a Dynasty

and son had gone hunting with falcons in the Huerta de Murcia, and while chasing a saker falcon found themselves at risk because of the many irrigation ditches in the area.242 Infante Manuel was a master falconer, had more birds of prey than any other nobleman of the period, and apparently spent a good deal of his leisure time pursuing the sport. Alfonso Manuel would have been about eleven years old in 1272, and we may assume that he was equally as enthusiastic about falconry as his father. It is not difficult to imagine the camaraderie that must have existed between the two, and it is the memory of moments such as these that provide a certain poignancy in the context of Alfonso’s unanticipated demise three years later in Montpellier. On 5 May, the infantes Fadrique, Felipe, and Manuel, together for the last time in Murcia, co-signed a dispensation issued to the city council by their brother Alfonso X.243 The king’s final official document was despatched there on 15 June, and he departed the city with his siblings and the royal entourage the following day.244 He would not return to Murcia until September 1274 on his journey to France to confer with Pope Gregory X in Beaucaire.

5 Revolt of the Nobles and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

Having left Murcia on 16 June, Alfonso reached Cieza the f­ollowing day and proceeded from there to Alcaraz, where he arrived on 23 June. Here, the CAX informs us, he received word from his son Don ­Fernando and Infante Manuel in Seville that a large contingent of S ­ aracens from overseas, summoned by the sultan of Granada, had d ­ isembarked at ­Tarifa and attacked the stronghold of Vejer de la ­Frontera “and ­because of this, the king commanded all his forces on the frontier to make war on the king of Granada.”1 Once again, however, the c­ hronicle is ­effectively contradicted by a chancery document dated that very same day in ­Alcaraz and confirmed by all of the members of the king’s court who had accompanied him from Murcia, including “El inffante don F ­ redric  ... El inffante don Felipp ... El inffante don Loys ... Don ­Henrrique Perez, repostero mayor del rey, adelantado en el regno de Murçia por el inffante don Ferrando ... El infante don Ferrando, fiio mayor del rey e su mayordomo ... El infante don Manuel, ermano del rey e su alferez.”2 Two days later, the same signatories confirm another royal document in Alcaraz, though this time Don Fernando and Infante Manuel are absent.3 However, they are both present once again three weeks later at the court in Cuenca, hardly sufficient time for them to have travelled to Seville and back.4 Nevertheless, between 15 July and 27 October 1272, Don Fernando and Infante Manuel appear to be entirely absent from court; it was most likely during this hiatus that the two were engaged in confronting the recent invasion of the Marinids, who had reportedly disembarked in Tarifa. As the king’s mayordomo and heir apparent, Infante Fernando was the highest-ranking official of the royal household, while Infante Manuel, his alférez, was second in command. At seventeen years of age, Fernando was only slightly older than Manuel’s own son, Alfonso, and it is reasonable to suppose that all three royals were actively engaged

148

Dawn of a Dynasty

in responding to the current crisis in Andalusia. Textual confirmation of their actions is found in a chancery document issued in Toledo by Alfonso X some seven months later on 12 February 1273 to the town council of Cáceres for “the assistance you gave me and my son, Infante Don Fernando, when you entered the kingdom of Granada with him.”5 While Alfonso urgently sought the support of the disaffected nobles in the impending campaign against the Marinids, the CAX recalls that the king, who was in Cuenca from 15 July to the first of August, had received notice there of confidential correspondence directed to the ­rebellious ­nobles by the Marinid emir of Morocco, Abu Yusuf Yaqub, and recently intercepted by one of Alfonso’s loyal retainers. Based on the emir’s promise to come to the aid of the rebels as soon as he had successfully concluded the siege of Tlemcen – a goal realized in June 1272, as we are informed by the fourteenth-century Arabic historian Ibn Abi Zar in Rawd al-Qirtas – we can deduce that the Marinid incursion south of Cádiz must have taken place in August or September, precisely the interval in which Don Fernando and Infante Manuel were absent from court on the king’s orders to contain the invasion.6 This, then, is the period to which the CAX refers when it places the two of them in Seville, and not during the first few weeks following the king’s departure from Murcia in June. In this context, however, it is important to consider what Ibn Abi Zar reports about Abu Yusuf following the siege: “He decamped from ­Tlemcen and returned a conqueror to Mogreb; he arrived in Rabat-Taza the first of Dulhicha of that same year – 29 June 1272 – and there he spent the feast of the sacrifice – 8 July – . Then he resumed his march towards Fez where he arrived the first of Moharrem – 29 July 1272 – ; there he remained until 11 Safar – 7 September 1272 – . During this time his son, Abu Malec Abdeluahed, died and he greatly mourned his loss. He went to Marrakesh, arriving there the first of Rabia el tani of the same year – 26 October 1272 – ; he settled his affairs, pacified the city and its surroundings and set out for Tangier” (317). Confronted with the loss of his son, Abu Yusuf had effectively postponed his invasion of the Peninsula. In fact, the attack on Vejer and a subsequent offensive shortly thereafter by the Moors against Algeciras were apparently part of an artful stratagem conceived by the wily emir of Granada to trick Alfonso X into believing the kingdom was under attack by the emir of Morocco in order to compel him to come to the bargaining ­table with terms favourable to Granada. The king alludes to this ruse several months later in May 1273 in response to a letter he had recently received from Infante Fernando, when he counsels his son to beware of those who had lately convinced him to mount an attack against a supposed landing party in Algeciras captained by the forces of the son



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

149

of Abu Yusuf, a campaign in which Don Fernando “had achieved neither profit nor honour.”7 Yet another significant factor that effectively diminished the threat of imminent conflict in the region was the failing health of the seventy-eight-year-old sultan of Granada, Mohammed I, who had recently named his successor, mindful, no doubt, of his own impending demise, which occurred several months later in January 1273. In the meantime, during the absence of Don Fernando and Infante Manuel in Seville, the governance of the kingdom of Murcia remained in the capable hands of its adelantado, Enrique Pérez de Harana, who approved the partition of Orihuela on 7 September.8 In the meantime, the king had arrived in Burgos on 6 September, where he undertook serious talks with the insurgents, who demanded that he convoke the cortes as soon as possible to deal with their problems, and it was agreed that representatives of the three estates would meet in Burgos on 29 September immediately following Michaelmas. Ten days later, Alfonso received the unsettling news from the Castilian legation in Rome that his petition to be crowned emperor had been rudely rebuffed by Gregory X.9 To add to his great dissatisfaction, the assembly at Burgos was punctuated by diverse acts of disobedience and disrespect for the monarch on the part of various representatives of both the aristocracy and the church, an ominous sign of the unusual depth and intensity of social discontent. Alleging royal abuse of power and specific violations of the laws of the land, the rebels were nonetheless no match for the very sovereign who had authored the S ­ iete ­Partidas and was himself an expert in jurisprudence.10 A majority of the three estates upheld the sovereign, with the result that the rejected ­nobles took what must have seemed the only avenue open to them that would preserve their dignity: the renunciation of all feudal ties to the king of Castile-León. Though Ballesteros maintains Don Fernando and Infante Manuel were in Seville during the cortes, both of them, together with Enrique Pérez de Harana, confirm a royal privilege granted in Burgos on 27  ­October, nearly a month after the assembly had first convened.11 Given the improbable threat of war with the Moroccans in Andalusia during fall 1272 and the fundamental issues to be addressed by the convocation, the king was in greater need of his family and close allies in Burgos than in Seville, and we must suppose that Infante Manuel was there with his brother to offer whatever advice and encouragement he might provide. We have no official date for the conclusion of the cortes. Ballesteros asserts it continued through the end of November, while González Jiménez believes it had ended by 20 October.12 Under the circumstances, it seems reasonable to surmise that neither Fernando de la

150

Dawn of a Dynasty

Cerda nor Infante Manuel would have had any motive to leave Burgos until the seditious nobles had made their decision to abandon the cortes sometime in D ­ ecember. In this same vein, we may suppose that public dialogue with the rebels had effectively ceased by the end of October and that the month of ­November was devoted to the development of a private plan of action to be agreed upon by a select commission made up of the leaders of the opposition and the most prominent members of the three estates appointed by Alfonso X and officiated by Queen Violante (Fig. 14).13 The commission, however, was largely unproductive, and by the beginning of December the dissidents were determined to renounce their feudal ties with the king of Castile, a decision hastened by the knowledge that any possible alliance with Henry I of Navarre had been thwarted once and for all by the betrothal of Henry’s infant son, ­Thibault, to Violante, Alfonso’s youngest daughter, in September of that year. Nevertheless, Yanguas y Miranda, based on contemporary documents, states unequivocally that “D. Juan Núñez swore fealty in [January] 1273 to King Henry, promising that in case Alfonso of Castile attempted to invade Navarre ... Núñez would come to the aid of the king of Navarre, nor would he make peace nor any agreement with the king of Castile without the approval of the king of Navarre. The same oath was sworn by D. Lope Díaz de Haro, Alvar Díaz de Asturias, Nuño González, his son Núñez, and Infante Felipe.”14 Recalling the Cid’s ­exile from ­Castile over two centuries earlier, the rebels now requested a period of ­forty-two days to enable them to prepare for their voluntary expatriation.15 They would seek refuge with the sultan of Granada and, in a fit of pique, ravage the lands through which they passed on their way towards the Moorish frontier. Under the circumstances, Alfonso X was obliged to make a precipitous departure from Burgos in an attempt to curtail these aggressions by heading off the rebels in the area of Madrid, where he arrived around 13 December.16 About this same time, the insurgents had encamped to the northeast in Atienza some 125 kilometres distant. Here the CAX relates that the king “dispatched Sancho, archbishop of ­Toledo, and the bishops of Palencia and Segovia to Don Fernando and Infante Manuel that together they might intercept Infante Felipe and the rebellious ­nobles and try to persuade them to return to the fold. And these knights accompanied the rebels as far as the borders of the kingdom, advising them and warning them not to harm the inhabitants of the realm. But they were unwilling to accept these conditions and, instead, seized many head of cattle and everything else they could find and set fire to several farms and villages and violated the sanctity of churches.”17 ­Unable to dissuade the renegades from their purpose, the



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

151

king despatched messengers with letters addressed to each of them that occupy fully nine chapters of the royal chronicle (CAX, 28–36). From Atienza, the rebels proceeded to Sabiote, seven kilometres to the northeast of Úbeda, on their way to Jaén and the kingdom of ­Granada. Here the CAX reports that they were again intercepted by “the heir apparent, Infante Don Fernando, who arrived there with Infante Don S ­ ancho, archbishop of Toledo, and Infante Don Manuel and the bishops of Palencia, Segovia, and Cádiz and the masters of the Order of Santiago, Calatrava, and Alcántara together with Don Diego Sánchez [adelantado de la frontera]. And these infantes, prelates, and masters spoke with the rebels pointing out to them the error of their ways and did all that they could to convince them not to go over to the enemy. But no matter how much they reasoned with them, they were unable to convince them to return to the king’s service in spite of the many promises they made. And since they were unable by these means to convince them, they showed them letters which were written and sealed by the king” (CAX, 39.114). The despatches were concessions to the rebels that had been drawn up by the queen, archbishop, and prelates of the commission meant to appease the dissidents and bring them back to the fold. The CAX relates, however, that Infante Felipe and the nobles, “once they had heard the conditions and had seen what Don Fernando and the others who accompanied him had to say, they were not satisfied with the king’s offer and made counteroffers of the things they wanted and gave their demands to the archbishop and Don Manuel to take back to the monarch. And they left Sabiote and set out for Granada taking with them all that which they had seized in Castile” (40.116). We know this particular episode took place before Christmas, since one of the demands forwarded by the rebels at this point references a truce they stipulated be made with the sultan of Granada “desta Nauidat fasta vn anno” (116). The rebels had reached Granada by the end of December or early January.18 Meanwhile, Infante Manuel and Don Fernando remained with the royal entourage, which on 3 January was in Urbión, half way between Burgos and Soria, where the king issued a privilege confirming the fuero of Úbeda, which was duly endorsed by all the royal negotiators who had recently attempted to reason with the rebels in Sabiote, including Infante Manuel.19 By 22 January the royal court was in Toledo, where the CAX chronicles a series of missives despatched by the king and carried back and forth between the rebels and Alfonso X by his negotiators, with Infante Manuel figuring prominently among them: Infante Sancho, the archbishop of Toledo, and Infante Manuel came to King Alfonso in Toledo and informed him of how they, with Infante Don

152

Dawn of a Dynasty

Fernando, the prelates and masters of the military Orders, had spoken with Infante Felipe and the nobles and that they were unwilling to a­ ccept any conditions or postpone their journey into exile. And the king, upon hearing this, sent them a message sealed with his seal to which they ­responded with the following [41.117] ... And after the archbishop and ­Infante Manuel had shown the king their message and had spoken with him concerning the rebels’ demands, although it seemed passing strange to the king and exceedingly awkward to accede to these requirements which the nobles had made with such arrogance, he nevertheless placed the matter in the hands of the queen and his brothers, Don Fadrique and Don Manuel, and they and the king dispatched their response in this ­manner ... “Know that the archbishop came to me in Toledo and showed me the things you demand that I do ... and told me that if I were to do these things that you would return to my service. And the queen and the archbishop and Don Manuel prevailed upon me to grant you these concessions. And although they are serious matters, particularly concerning the manner in which they were made, nevertheless, I was persuaded by my family members to grant these demands wherefore it pleases me to accept all of these requests” [41.119] ... And when Infante Felipe and the nobles had seen the letters from the queen, the archbishop and Infante Manuel, they responded to the archbishop thanking him for having interceded with the king to grant them those things the chronicle states they were offered ... and they said that at the time the letters had arrived, the sultan of Granada had died and that they had proclaimed his son and heir the new king [44.127–8].

This last reference effectively dates the episode to 23 January, the date of the death of Mohammed I, whose demise initiated a sequence of palace intrigues to determine his successor, with his son, Mohammed II, supported by the Castilian exiles. This incident also served as a warning to the disaffected nobles that the kingdom of Granada was no longer the safe haven they had earlier imagined, setting the stage for their proximate repatriation. By the end of February 1273, the king had arranged for a meeting in Almagro, thirty-five kilometres to the southeast of Ciudad Real, to which he summoned many of the principal political figures of the realm, whose deliberations were duly transmitted to the rebels and the sultan of Granada.20 The CAX informs us in detail that “those who came to this assembly were Infante Don Ferrando and the king’s ­brothers Don Fadrique and Don Manuel and the masters of Uclés, Calatrava, ­Alcántara, the Temple, and the prior of the Hospitallers ... and other nobles, and knights from the cities and towns whom the king commanded



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

153

to appear” (47.133, 137). In the meantime, Mohammed II of Granada sent word to Alfonso X proposing that he and the Castilian enter into compliance with the terms of the Treaty of Alcalá de ­Benzayde, an ­armistice that had been signed by the king and the new sultan’s father in August 1265, at the close of the previous conflict between them. This new development would reconfirm a treaty that declared the ruler of Granada to be a vassal of King Alfonso and by its provisions would bring the rebels once again under the jurisdiction of their royal nemesis.21 The conspirators now found themselves in an untenable position that threatened their safe haven in the kingdom of Granada. In the meantime, the king set out for Toledo, sending Don Fernando on to Córdoba with a substantial retinue of armed knights and advisors.22 It is quite possible that Infante Manuel accompanied his nephew to ­Córdoba, since neither of them are present in chancery documents until the beginning of June. By 28 March Alfonso X and his entourage had arrived in Toledo, where the king issued a charter confirming the royal privileges he had granted to the rebellious nobles during the assembly, a document that once again provides us with an extensive list of those in attendance in Almagro.23 Throughout the protracted discussions with the rebels, Alfonso X was clearly interested not in revenge but a rapid cessation of hostilities that would allow him to pursue his imperial ambitions, especially in light of Pope Gregory’s call in April 1273 for a European council of prelates and sovereigns in Lyon to seek, among other things, a lasting solution to the crucial question of the Holy Roman Empire. The king knew that if his imperial pretensions were ever to be realized he had to be present for this critical convocation, scheduled to commence in May 1274. To this end he summoned an assembly of the representatives of the towns of León and Extremadura to be held in Ávila during April 1273. The F ­ ebruary assembly in Almagro had served to severely reduce the credibility of the conspirators. The subsequent month-long assembly in Ávila, from the end of April to the end of May, would prove to be even more devastating to their cause, with the sudden and unexpected defection from the conspiracy of Infante Felipe’s brother-in-law, ­Ferrán Ruiz de Castro, and his followers. For the moment it seemed that ­Alfonso X had successfully defused the insurrection.24 At this juncture, Alfonso sat down to compose a letter to his young son, Fernando de la Cerda, in response to earlier despatches received from the infante, who was in Córdoba while his father was presiding over the assembly in Ávila. This particular episode chronicled by the CAX (52.144–51) must have taken place during the month of May, since by 3 June Fernando was back with the king’s court, which was

154

Dawn of a Dynasty

now in Guadalajara where both he and Infante Manuel confirm a royal privilege dispensed to the knights and citizens of Seville.25 Contrary to the monarch’s expectations, the interval between the assemblies at Almagro and Ávila during the month of March had been punctuated by hesitancy and indecision on the part of Alfonso’s chief negotiator, Juan González, master of the Order of Calatrava. He had, in fact, counselled Fernando to accede to the rebels’ shameful demand that the recently negotiated tribute of 250,000 maravedís to be rendered by the sultan of Granada be distributed, instead, among the insurgents in ­return for their renewed allegiance to the crown. Alfonso X was furious and cautioned the young prince to beware of the advice proffered by the ­masters of Calatrava and Santiago, especially the latter, who, he observed, “was one of those who had most adamantly counseled the rebels to do what they did. And I commanded him to go straightway to the kingdom of Murcia where he might better serve us and he refused to do so and went instead to the rebels whom he counselled to do what they are doing and to you to induce you to do what he advised.”26 The reluctance of Pelay Pérez to proceed to Murcia as the monarch had commanded, however, was most certainly a decision taken in recognition of the harm such armed intervention would imply at this point for a region that had struggled to retain the few Mudéjar residents who remained following the 1264 uprising, not to mention the difficulty of preserving a hospitable environment to attract the muchneeded ­Christian settlers. In this context, we must remember that Infante ­Manuel was a cofrade or lay brother of the Order of Santiago and a close friend of maestre Pelay Pérez de Correa. Both of them had laboured for years to develop their sizeable agricultural holdings in the kingdom of Murcia, and neither was anxious to jeopardize its fragile economy or their mutual interests by supporting an unwarranted incursion into their domains. Be that as it may, there is yet another aspect of this matter that has been overlooked by both Ballesteros and González Jiménez in their biographies of Alfonso X: it concerns a petition transmitted by the maestre and brethren of the Order of Santiago to Gregory X imploring the pontiff to facilitate the return of property unlawfully seized from the Order during December 1272 when the rebels ravaged the lands through which they passed on their way to the Moorish frontier. While we do not have the original petition, the pope’s subsequent response in a flurry of letters despatched to the archbishop of Seville, archdeacon of Huete, abbot of Valladolid, archbishop of Toledo, and canon of the Cathedral of Cuenca between 21 and 28 July 1274 specifically names the miscreants and directs the ecclesiastical authorities to demand restoration of the purloined property under pain of excommunication.



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

155

The nobles indicted in these epistles were Don Felipe, Nuño González, Lope Díaz, Fernán Ruiz de Castro, Esteban Fernández, Alvar Díaz, Rodrigo Rodríguez, and Juan Núñez, among others, the same insurgents with whom Alfonso believed Pelay Pérez de Correa had allied himself.27 Clearly, the renegades had shown no respect for either the possessions of the Order or the person of Pelay Pérez, and it would be unwarranted to conclude that the maestre had been supportive of them at that juncture. The king must have realized this soon after the fact, since he was accompanied by the maestre on the journey to confer with the pope at least as far as Barcelona in January 1275, indicating the two had reached a temporary truce of sorts arranged, no doubt, with the active intervention of Infante Manuel.28 As for the master of Calatrava, the king’s reproach was less severe: “I must tell you that no matter how much I love him and believe him to be a good man, he is beholden to Lope Díaz [de Haro] and those of his lineage.”29 In effect, whereas Pelay Pérez was frankly disobliging, Juan González was merely foolish, though the advice of both was equally untenable. At the same time, Manuel’s ties to Juan González, though perhaps not so personal as those that bound him to Pelay Pérez, were equally contractual, including a legal agreement confirmed on 26  ­September 1267 by which the infante had accepted in tenancy all of the Order’s possessions in Peñafiel to be held by him during his lifetime.30 In any case, as the negotiations with the rebels in Granada progressed, it became evident to the king that both Pelay Pérez and Juan González were inclined to favour the cause of the nobles, and this fact may well have compromised Infante Manuel’s own standing with his brother at least temporarily, since he no longer plays an active role in negotiating with the dissidents. The same may be said for Infante Fadrique. It is understandable that the king would be unwilling to enter into direct discourse with the dissidents or dignify their shameful demands with his presence. There remains, however, another facet in the matter of the king’s absence in the negotiations: his physical health, which is mentioned for the first time in his letter to Infante Fernando during May 1273 when he remarks that he was “in Ávila where I came to speak with the councils of León and Extremadura, which I convoked there, and I was sick with rheum and a little fever, and I was greatly distressed that this should happen to me at such a time.”31 The fever and watery discharge of the eyes and nose to which he refers were severe enough to cause the sovereign some concern, and under the circumstances were most probably related to the worsening maxillary sinusitis and eventual squamous-cell carcinoma that would complicate his existence for the next decade.32

156

Dawn of a Dynasty

A month later, in June, given the uncertain loyalties of Fadrique and Manuel together with his own precarious health, the convalescent monarch despatched his wife, Queen Violante, to confer with Infante ­Fernando and renew the process of mediation with the rebels in ­Córdoba.33 Meanwhile, Infante Manuel remained at court with the king, as evidenced by his confirmation of twelve royal writs: one in ­Guadalajara on 3 June, which is also co-signed by Infante ­Fernando;34 four in Segovia on 15 June, one of which (2) is co-signed by Infante ­Fernando;35 two in Segovia on 16 June;36 one in Guadalajara on 27 June;37 one in Guadalajara on 1 July in which Manuel confirms as mayordomo del rey;38 and three in Guadalajara on 3 July, one of which (3) is co-signed by Don Fernando.39 Infante Manuel had come into partial possession of Peñafiel six years earlier when the Order of Calatrava ceded to him their holdings there ­during his lifetime, and now he had effectively become the most ­authoritative voice for the resolution of most issues within that jurisdiction. To this end, he despatched an order to the town council, judges, and good men of Peñafiel on 16 June 1273, commanding them to desist from taxing the inhabitants for other than the martiniega, a duty payable every St. Martín’s Day, and the moneda forera, a royal levy imposed by the king twice every seven years to assure that he would not devalue the currency.40 During this same summer of 1273, the chronology of events as recalled by the CAX is complicated by the fact that chancery documents continue to sporadically record the presence of Infante Fernando at court in Guadalajara on 3 June, Segovia on 15 June, and again in ­Guadalajara on 3 July while he was ostensibly with his mother, Queen Violante, in ­Córdoba. Perhaps the confusion may be mitigated somewhat by a writ constituting an order of arrest issued by the king in Guadalajara on 1 July but signed by his brother: “Infante Don Manuel, the king’s mayordomo, commands this to be written by order of the king,” indicating that the infante had temporarily assumed the duties of his nephew Fernando, who was absent from court. In fact, Alfonso X subsequently clarifies the matter in a letter to Don Fernando in which he praises his son for his resolution of the conflict with the rebellious nobles, stating at the same time that the young prince’s actions, taken without the intervention of the monarch or other advisers, had the ultimate effect of strengthening his future position as a leader.41 Based on these facts, we may conclude that Infante Manuel was not with Don Fernando in Córdoba during June and July, but continued to remain with his brother at court. These same inconsistencies with regard to royal chancery documents and the circumstances narrated by the CAX



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

157

are present in the same chapter recalling Queen Violante’s embassy to Córdoba, in which we are told the king had also received letters from his son-in-law, William VII, m ­ arquess of Montferrat, who complained that ­Alfonso’s failure to respond in timely fashion to the matter of ­empire had now jeopardized the Ghibelline enterprise in Lombardy, yet the marquess confirms a royal document in Segovia on 15 June and another in ­Guadalajara on 3 July, indicating he was not in Italy but with Alfonso at the time.42 The presence of the marquess at the court of ­Castile during this period would have important ramifications scarcely two years later, when ­Infante ­Manuel married his aunt, Beatrice contesson of Savoy. In the interim, Alfonso X had prudently made arrangements to meet with his father-in-law in Requena, a small town approximately sixty kilometres due west of Valencia, where they would discuss the circumstances under which the Aragonese would provide military assistance should the emir of Granada and the nobles renew hostilities. The CAX informs us that the king was accompanied on this journey by “Infante Don Sancho, archbishop of Toledo and son of King Jaime, and Infante Don Manuel, and Infante Don Sancho, son of King Don Alfonso, and the king’s nephew, Don Alfonso de Molina, together with a company of prelates, nobles, knights, and citizens of the towns” (55.157). Departing from Segovia around the middle of the month, the royal cortège had reached Guadalajara by 24 June, arriving in Cuenca by 18 July. Here the sovereign received an urgent request from Queen Violante and Don Fernando to join them in their talks with the insurgents in Córdoba.43 Again, we must suppose that Alfonso was unable to attend these crucial negotiations either because of illness or because of the impending meeting with Jaime I in Requena. Certainly the trek towards Valencia was painfully slow, and we have no documentary evidence of the monarch’s whereabouts during the month of August. Ballesteros has deduced from Aragonese records documenting Jaime’s itinerary that the meeting must have occurred between 22 and 28 August 1273.44 The CAX recalls that, following their deliberations, Jaime I returned to Valencia while his son-in-law sojourned in Requena, recovering from a “terciana” or tertian fever, recurring at forty-eight-hour intervals, an indication of what by now had most likely developed into a chronic illness.45 A lack of correspondence or written evidence for Alfonso X during the month of August is suggestive of a disability serious enough to halt the normal correspondence that regularly flowed from the king’s chancery. Not even the exigencies of the critical matters discussed by the sovereign and his father-in-law were sufficient to produce the number of communications we usually observe in these circumstances, and

158

Dawn of a Dynasty

we must conclude that only the king’s ailment had prevented him from undertaking his typical duties at this time.46 Faced with a deficit of historical data, we are fortunate to have the ­evidence provided by Cantiga 235, which informs us that “in Requena, this king fell gravely ill / and when they thought he would die, he recovered from that malady; / She [the Virgin Mary] had performed this miracle for him” (st. 7bcd).47 Clearly, the king was not afflicted with a simple tertian fever but was so close to death that those attending him thought he would not recover. Furthermore, the fact that he was in Guadalajara at a distance of more than two hundred kilometres from Requena on 2 September 1273, scarcely a week after his meeting with Jaime I, offers a striking endorsement of the Cantiga’s claim for a miraculous recovery. By 15 September the king was in Brihuega, less than twenty-five ­kilometres from Guadalajara. Two weeks later, he had arrived in San Esteban de Gormaz, from whence he travelled to Burgos, arriving there on 15 October. It was here and in these disquieting circumstances that he most likely received the distressing news that the German princes had elected Rudolf of Habsburg to the imperial throne on 1 October. The king would remain in Burgos until April of the following year.48 In the meantime, during the fall of 1273 Queen Violante and Infante Fernando had managed to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement with the emir of Granada and the rebels, who in spite of their insistence that the king be present to guarantee the terms of the treaty, had finally submitted to the will of the crown. The insurgents would renew their feudal vows and the king would receive a windfall of 250,000 maravedís in tribute from the reconciled sultan of Granada, who by this act of obeisance had come into faithful compliance with the 1265 Treaty of Alcalá de Benzayde. With what he perceived to be the financial means to achieve his dream and against all odds, given Rudolf’s recent election, Alfonso X was more determined than ever to invest this substantial sum in a last-ditch effort to secure the imperial throne. At the same time, Pope Gregory had written to him from Chambery on 3 November acceding to his request for an interview, so that everything he had envisaged in this regard still seemed perfectly plausible.49 On 24 January of the new year, the king was in nearby Santo ­Domingo de la Calzada, accompanied by Infante Manuel who, with Don ­Fernando, endorsed a royal document authorizing the town of Écija to hold an annual fair during Lent.50 The sovereign spent the first three months of 1274 in Burgos, where he summoned a session of the cortes during March.51 The CAX entirely omits the year 1274, variously assigning the activities from this twelve-month span to 1273 or 1275. The chronicle reports Alfonso X was in Toledo, not Burgos, where he convoked the cortes in 1275, not 1274, though we know he had not



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

159

r­ eturned to Toledo since the spring of the preceding year. In any case, the CAX does confirm that Infante Manuel was with the king during the cortes of Burgos: “And with him there were Infante Don Manuel, his brother, and the others who would go with him to see the pope. And the king gave them all they would need for the journey ... And he commanded that many ships in the ports of Seville, Galicia, and Asturias be laden with wheat and barley and wine and other viands which would travel by sea to the port of Marseilles. And he also sent ahead by land many horses and mules laden with all those things he understood would be needful for that trip” (59.170–1). At this same time, Jaime I of Aragón was making preparations to attend the Council of Lyon from May to June and, prior to departing for France, sought reassurance that the kingdom of Murcia would not become a source of conflict during his absence, given the recent problems with the emir of Granada. He must also have been cognizant of the need to maintain law and order along the coastal route from Murcia to Barcelona and thence to France that the Castilian king would take on his own journey to confer with the pontiff. To this end, the Aragonese monarch travelled first to Infante Manuel’s domain in Elche and then to Murcia during January 1274.52 Contemporary chancery records report that while there he addressed a complaint brought by the town council of ­Cartagena against the admiral of Catalonia, Romeu de Castellet, who had, on Jaime’s orders, captured all ships, sailors, and merchants proceeding from the North ­African kingdom of Tlemcen in reprisal for previous attacks against Catalan traders. Among those apprehended were ships, crews, and goods seized in the Port of Santa Pola in Infante Manuel’s domain, “[a]nd they also detained in the port of Infante Don ­Manuel two Jews in another boat, and also captured a certain boat in which Alvar Martínez, an ambassador of the illustrious king of Castile, and two ambassadors of the king of Tlemcen were travelling together with other Sarracens.”53 Evidence from the Repartimiento de Murcia ­reveals that Alvar Martínez was a landholder in Cudiacibit and certainly known to Infante Manuel.54 A week later in Biar, the Aragonese monarch issued a proclamation providing royal protection for “all those ships in the port of Infante Don Manuel, now or in the future, together with the goods and people in them.”55 Santa Pola was at this time a growing c­ entre of Mediterranean commerce for the kingdom of Murcia, located between the major seaports of Cartagena to the south and Alicante to the north, and Alfonso’s arrangements to provision the royal entourage travelling to France must surely have included some contact with Santa Pola. In the meantime, Alfonso X and Infante Manuel had left Burgos, travelling south during the month of April, passing through Palencia on the

160

Dawn of a Dynasty

seventeenth and arriving in Valladolid on the twenty-sixth. A few days later, on the first of May, Jaime I of Aragon arrived at the papal court in Lyon to attend the European council of prelates and princes to discuss, among other matters, a final resolution of the imperial question so dear to the king of Castile and León. Why had Alfonso chosen not to attend the council from its inception, given his overweening ambitions in this direction and the past sacrifices he had made to achieve this elusive goal? First, and perhaps most importantly, the king was fully aware of the pope’s predilection for Rudolf of Hapsburg, whose candidacy now seemed assured in light of his election to the imperial throne by the German princes a year earlier. Yet Alfonso’s incredible persistence, a foolish obstinacy, and an inability to place the matter in proper perspective had already determined the course of events. The financial outlay for such a journey was formidable, given the favourable impression the king hoped to make as a charitable and magnanimous ruler capable of financing the lavish expenses incumbent upon an emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. In fact, Jaime I was obliged to pledge his royal crown as security to meet his own expenditures for the trip, though he would realize no immediate economic advantage in this endeavour.56 Nevertheless, Alfonso had received 250,000 maravedís from the ruler of Granada in December 1273, monies that he fully intended to utilize in pursuing his political interests in Lyon and to appease the rebellious nobles who, during this same month in Seville, had been reconciled to some extent with their suzerain. Under these apparently favourable circumstances, why did the Castilian opt to postpone his own pilgrimage to the papal court at the most propitious moment, if ever there was one, for his fast-fading imperial aspirations? Aside from the definitive role of finances, the king would also have to muster a strong show of internal support for his claims to the imperial crown, and neither the nobility nor the church had shown itself to be supportive of this most nebulous enterprise. Clearly, Alfonso felt he had first to convince his compatriots to champion his cause before he could hope to persuade the pope. However, when we consider the evidence we now possess concerning the sovereign’s fragile physical condition, it is apparent that the strength and stamina necessary for a vigorous campaign of this nature were clearly lacking. It is this contingency that was likely the determinative factor in his decision to postpone negotiations with the pontiff. The symptomatology of his illness, with its cycle of agonizing pain and abrupt remission, was simply not conducive to forceful and deliberate action, but rather predisposed the monarch to bouts of depression, indecision, and frequent bizarre behaviour. Deferring his embassy to the papal council in Lyon, Alfonso convoked an assembly of nobles, jurists, and prelates in Zamora during



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

161

June and July 1274.57 We know that Infante Manuel was with the king in Zamora during these deliberations, confirming a royal privilege to the Cathedral of Seville on 6 June.58 By 22 July, a further complication had ensued with the passing of Henry I of Champagne, king of Navarre, leaving his three-year-old daughter, Jeanne I (r. 1274–1305), to inherit the throne since his infant son, Thibault, betrothed to ­Alfonso’s daughter Violante, had also died shortly before. Henry’s widow, ­ Blanche of Artois, was first cousin to Philippe III of France, who had succeeded to the French crown at the death of his father St. Louis in 1270, and Philippe was very much interested in consolidating and perpetuating French claims to Navarre through a marriage of his own son and heir, Louis, to the infant Jeanne.59 Henry’s untimely demise now set the stage for a power struggle in Pamplona between three political factions allied variously with Castile, France, and Aragon.60 Alfonso X, ever mindful of the overarching need for peninsular unity, advanced his own rather tenuous claims to the Navarrese throne on the grounds that King García IV Ramírez of Navarre (1134–50) had been a vassal of Alfonso VII.61 In the meantime, Pope Gregory X presided over the Council of Lyon with single-minded resolve. Called from a crusade in Palestine to head the church in 1271, Gregory had never abandoned his determination to unite all of Christendom against Islam, and the Council of Lyon was  the instrument he would use to achieve this goal. Gregory realized the importance of settling the imperial question once and for all and the absurdity of yielding to Alfonso’s preposterous demands, yet he could not easily afford to ignore the claims of a powerful political figure around whom so many of the anti-papal Ghibelline factions of northern Italy had now rallied. To this end, Gregory made Alfonso a most generous offer on 11 June, to share with him fully one-tenth of all ecclesiastical revenues for six years if the Castilian would desist from his imperial pretensions and devote his efforts to a new crusade.62 The extent to which Alfonso’s obsession with the imperial crown had driven him may be measured by his refusal of this most magnanimous proposition, though he did not reject the idea of a crusade.63 The pope was also aware of the need to enlist Alfonso’s support in any preparations to embark upon a new crusade, and to this end issued a papal bull on 24 July 1274 condemning the divisive stratagems of the recalcitrant nobles. On 31 July, Alfonso X and Infante Manuel were in Olmedo, where the monarch despatched a privilege to the clergy of Medina de Pomar, a document in which Manuel now confirms for the last time as “ermano del Rey e su alférez,” a rank he will not take up again until a year later following his return to Castile from Beaucaire, where he and his brother would meet with the pontiff.64

162

Dawn of a Dynasty

In August 1274, political intrigue in Navarre had become so intense that the regent queen, Blanche, was forced to take refuge in France with her young daughter Jeanne, seeking the protection of her cousin Philippe III the Bold. Alfonso had no doubt foreseen this possibility some months earlier as King Henry’s condition began to deteriorate. The matter of the Navarrese succession was yet another problem he would have to confront, together with an economic crisis, the rebellious nobles, and his own perilous health. In any case, the king proceeded to renounce his personal claims to the Navarrese throne in favour of his son, Fernando de la Cerda, who marched without delay towards ­Pamplona, laying siege to the town of Viana on 3 September 1274. When his efforts in this area were frustrated, Fernando changed v ­ enues, besieging Mendavia, which surrendered to him towards the middle of November 1274. Alfonso was sufficiently confident of his young son’s military prowess to allow him to proceed on his own, and this time it would appear that his usual partner, Infante Manuel, the king’s alférez, failed to accompany him on the Navarrese campaign.65 It is also quite possible that, in the absence of his father and Infante ­Manuel, Don ­Fernando had begun to rely on the advice of his uncle Fadrique, as we find in two documents dated several months later in April 1275, when the young prince makes specific reference to his reliance on the counsel of Fadrique and Nuño González de Lara.66 These two occasions are significant when we consider that in spite of Infante Manuel’s close association with his young nephew, none of Infante Fernando’s extant chancery documents make any mention of Manuel whatsoever. Pope Gregory X was quick to manifest his great displeasure with this renewed display of disunity among Christian nations, and took a deliberate step to obstruct Alfonso’s pretensions to the imperial throne by issuing papal confirmation of the election of Rudolf of Hapsburg as emperor of Germany on 26 September 1274. Alfonso, who had left ­Zamora at the close of the assembly there towards the end of July, was in ­Cifuentes by the end of August and in Murcia by the end of ­September, where he most likely learned of Rudolf’s confirmation, reasoning at this point that any further delay in meeting with the pontiff would most surely and permanently jeopardize his imperial aspirations. The only documents we have that relate to Infante Manuel’s activities from June 1274, when he participated in the assembly of Zamora, to September 1275, following the discussions with Gregory X in France, are three undated communications he received from the pontiff during a fourmonth interval between December 1274 and March 1275. Nevertheless, the CAX asserts that he remained with the king throughout this entire period: “And with him there [during the assembly] were his brother



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

163

Infante Don Manuel and the others who would accompany him to see the pope ... and travelling with him were his brother Infante Don Manuel and other knights whom he understood were essential to this enterprise.”67 By 16 October the Castilian monarch had arrived in Alicante, and spent several weeks there provisioning ships that would proceed in advance to Marseilles and thence up the mouth of the Rhone to Lyon to await his arrival while he travelled by land along the Mediterranean coast. ­Alfonso probably reached Valencia about the middle of ­November 1274, departing a few weeks later for Barcelona, where he arrived during the Christmas holidays.68 In the meantime, on 28 ­November, and without any official recognition of the fact from either Alfonso’s chancery or the CAX, Infante Felipe expired unnoticed in Villalcázar de Sirga, just a few kilometres distant from Carrión de los Condes where Infante Manuel had been born thirty years earlier. However, the elaborate features of the internment, attended by many of the clergy, nobility, and knights Templar, all lavishly depicted on the polychromed sepulcher, would seem to belie the suggestion that he had expired in anonymity.69 Both Alfonso and Manuel were in Valencia at the time and did not attend the funeral. During the month of December, Pope Gregory must have viewed Alfonso’s relentless efforts to confer with him in France with ever-increasing apprehension, despatching a flurry of communications to the queen, Jaime I, Infante Manuel, and two apostolic nuncios, Guy de Montlaur, bishop of Valence,70 and Master Frèdol de Saint-Bonnet, canon of Maguelonne, prior of Lunel, and the pope’s chaplain, urging them to do all in their power to discourage the Castilian from pursuing his imperial ambitions. On 19 December 1274, Gregory X wrote to Alfonso informing him that he had despatched an embassy headed by the bishop of Valence, whom he hoped would persuade the king to relinquish his imperial pretensions.71 A day earlier, on 18 December, Gregory had despatched a letter to Infante Manuel, informing him of the very same delegation and requesting his support of the prelate’s efforts to dissuade his brother. The pontifical communication to Manuel is couched in the usual ornate rhetoric of the apostolic chancery, which, in the absence of arms, possessed the power of persuasion through fulsome praise and the promise of eternal salvation.72 The bishop of ­Valence, as a protagonist in the context of Infante Manuel’s life, was more than a mere papal representative to the king of Castile. The diocese of Valence had long held a special relationship with the House of Savoy, whose lords, the counts of Savoy, resided in the traditional capital of Chambéry just over one hundred kilometres to the north.

164

Dawn of a Dynasty

The apostolic nuncio, Guy de Montlaur, whom Manuel was urged to support by Gregory X, had been immediately preceded in the ­bishopric of Valence by the three sons of Count Thomas of Savoy, William (1231– 39), Boniface (1239–42), and Philippe (1242–68), the uncles of B ­ eatrice Contesson, who would, within the year, marry Infante Manuel and seven years later become the mother of Juan Manuel. On 31 December, Gregory despatched letters to Queen Violante, Jaime I, and Manuel expressing the same concerns and exhorting the ­recipients to once again assist the bishop of Valence and Magister Frèdol in their endeavours to dissuade the king, efforts that would be rewarded by the remission of their sins.73 Manuel must have answered the pope’s earlier message of 18 December almost immediately, since the pontiff now acknowledges receipt of the infante’s correspondence, requesting that he communicate with him as soon as possible indicating the king’s current state of mind and perceived intentions before their impending deliberations. The letter underscores the pope’s very realistic concerns with Alfonso’s mental condition and his own anxiety in the face of a looming confrontation with the delusional monarch.74 When pressed by the pontiff to provide obedient and unquestioning support of papal policies and objectives concerning his brother, Infante Manuel had responded not with obsequious compliance but, contrary to expectations, a reasoned defence of Alfonso’s pretensions, rebuking Gregory for his failure to adequately recognize and honour the ­Castilian’s legitimate claims and title of princeps. Responding with his usual shrewdness and good judgment, however, Gregory assured Manuel of the Curia’s high regard for Alfonso and his own desire to honour him by making sure that the king’s demands were in consonance with the general welfare of his subjects and the church. Alfonso X, his family, and entourage had spent the Christmas holidays in Barcelona, where Jaime I had spared no expense to accommodate his royal guests. They would remain there until the end of January, when the Castilian court set out for Perpignan, arriving in that city around 22 February.75 Here the king would leave his wife and children while he and Infante Manuel continued on towards France. Passing through Narbonne and Béziers, the monarch and his brother reached ­Montpellier, birthplace and feudal domain of Jaime I, sometime around the beginning of April, where the Catalan chronicler Muntaner reports that “the games and merriment surpassed all other festivities.”76 In this city, famous for its schools of law and medicine, Alfonso spent some fifteen days, and here he would return following his audience with the pope to recover from a critical relapse of his illness, no doubt attended by some of the finest physicians in Europe.77 In Montpellier sometime



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

165

during the first two weeks of April, he received word from the pope ­proposing an interview in Beaucaire, a small town on the Rhone roughly eighty kilometres distant and more easily accessible than Lyon, which would have required a journey more than five times as far78 (Fig. 24). Why had Gregory altered his itinerary? Perhaps because the Council of Lyon had now concluded its deliberations after nearly a year, or perhaps, with greater justification, the change was made in papal deference to the king’s ill health, which had once again reached crisis proportions. Cantiga 235 informs us that “when he left his land and went to see / the pope of that time, he fell so gravely ill / that they thought he would surely die.”79 This sober information, entirely at v ­ ariance with the lighthearted account of Ramon Muntaner, who emphasizes the ­festive air surrounding the expedition, specifies that ­Alfonso had become desperately ill on the road to Beaucaire. The delay in his journey, several weeks in Montpellier, lends credence to this report. At the same time, Gregory X was so impressed by Manuel’s integrity, his loyalty to both his brother and the Apostolic See, that he again wrote to the infante shortly after his missive to Alfonso suggesting Beaucaire, urging him to be sure to accompany his brother on the journey. With Manuel’s presence during the deliberations, the pontiff had some assurance that he would not be the only one there attempting to moderate the monarch’s irrational demands, and the infante could be counted on to participate with intelligence, objectivity, and nobilitas.80 The pope was in Beaucaire on 14 May 1275, and we may suppose that Alfonso had arrived there at about the same time.81 The papal ­audiences lasted nearly three months but ended no later than the end of July, since the king had returned to Montpellier by 5 August, where he issued a privilege to the town council of Ávila.82 Gregory would not depart from Beaucaire until shortly after 4 September.83 In the meantime, the interviews were inconclusive. The pope was obsessed with the idea of embarking upon a fresh expedition to the Holy Land with Alfonso’s assistance and was furthermore entirely unyielding in his ­demands that the king renounce all claims to the Holy Roman Empire. Equally obdurate, Alfonso never repudiated his imperial assertions in writing and, in fact, the CAX scarcely mentions Beaucaire or the events that took place there.84 To compound his frustration and defeat, Alfonso had received word sometime in late May or early June that the vanguard of a new Muslim invasion had disembarked in Tarifa on 13 May, though preparations had been well underway months earlier with the arrival of Moroccan contingents in January or February.85 The Marinid campaign, organized in league with the emir of Granada, had been prompted not only by the

166

Dawn of a Dynasty

divisive activities of the rebellious nobles but by the king’s own imperial ambitions that had focused his attention outside the Peninsula for over a year.86 The advance troops were soon followed by the Marinid emir of Morocco, Abu Yusuf, and the main Moorish assault forces on 16 August. In the face of this imminent threat, Infante Fernando had proceeded to Villa Real, where he planned to gather an army to confront the invaders but, for reasons unknown, he expired quite suddenly and unexpectedly on 24–25 July. The king must have learned of his son’s demise soon after his arrival in Montpellier.87 Cantiga 235 recalls the moment and claims that Alfonso nearly died: “Then he arrived in Montpellier and became so seriously ill / that of all the physicians there each and every one firmly believed / that he was surely dead; but he was completely cured by / the Holy Virgin, faithful Lady that She is.”88 This unique information, found nowhere else, is of the utmost consequence for a full understanding of Alfonso’s actions in the next few months, which now comprise a pivotal period in the history of Castile. In the meantime, while Manuel sojourned in Montpellier with the convalescent monarch, his son and heir, Alfonso Manuel, who had accompanied him on the trip to Beaucaire, fell ill and died sometime towards the end of August.89 Abruptly and without warning, all of ­Manuel’s hopes and plans for the creation of a powerful and independent dynasty in southeastern Spain were placed in jeopardy. Without a successor, his dominions were at risk of reverting to the crown at his death and all he had worked for would be lost. His ten-year-old ­daughter Violante was no substitute for a male heir, and the pressure on him at this moment to secure his legacy must have seemed compelling. In the midst of these familial misfortunes in which both the king and his younger brother suffered the loss of their eldest sons, the Marinid assault on Andalusia by Abu Yusuf continued apace. On 7 September, the invading army confronted the Castilians in Écija where, under the command of one of the principal rebels, Nuño González de Lara, governor of the frontier, the Christian forces were routed with the loss of their leader.90 The news of the calamitous Battle of Écija would have been more than sufficient reason to compel Alfonso to leave Montpellier, but he had only recently arrived there and his perilous physical condition would not have permitted him to depart at that point. Meanwhile the pope, who was in nearby Valence, wrote to his chaplain, Magister Frèdol, and Archbishop Remondo of Seville on ­ 13  and 28 September requesting them to convene with Alfonso and ­endeavour to persuade him to relinquish his continued use of the t­ itle Rex Romanorum.91 This is the first evidence we have that Infante M ­ anuel’s godfather, Remondo de Losana, had accompanied the royal entourage



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

167

on the trip to Beaucaire since, as Ballesteros accurately discerned, the pontiff’s request would have had no meaning if the archbishop were still in Seville, and of course the same may be said of Magister Frèdol, who, it seems, had left Beaucaire with the king and continued to accompany him while he was convalescing in ­Montpellier.92 Don Remondo must have been a great comfort to Infante Manuel as he pondered his uncertain future during those bleak days in Montpellier. Seeking solace in these disheartening circumstances, Manuel made a grand gesture, proposing to set out on a military expedition to the Holy Land where, with a band of two hundred Christian knights, he would follow Pope Gregory’s injunction to rekindle the spirit of the Crusades. To this end, he wrote the pontiff requesting a subsidy equal to a decima or tenth of the ecclesiastical revenues of Portugal to subsidize the campaign. While we do not have the document he addressed to Gregory X, we do possess the pope’s reply, which was despatched to the infante from Valence on 17 September: [Bishop Gregory, servant of the servants of God. Dear son,] noble Lord Emanuel, born to the king of Castile and León of glorious memory, ­[salutations and apostolic blessings.] Our dear son, Opizo, your knight and ambassador and the bearer of this letter, among other things which he related to us in our presence and on your behalf, humbly beseeched us that since you, because of your reverence for the Creator, who deigned to be crucified for the redemption of the human race, wish to distinguish yourself with the sign of the cross and personally travel in support of the Holy Land with a company of two hundred warriors, and so that you may more effectively carry out this plan, wish us to approve a subsidy of a tenth of the kingdom of Portugal. Therefore since we welcome your ­devotion and your person with sincere affection and open arms, and b ­ ecause we are especially desirous for the salvation of your soul, commending your wholesome wish unto the Lord, we want you to know that while the lands of our son in Christ, your brother, the illustrious king of Castile and León, are under imminent risk of attack by the Sarracens, it would not be proper for you to abandon that same king. At such time as peace may have been achieved for your brother, we may weigh those matters which you propose to carry out with the subsidy and you may rely on us to freely grant whatever permission you request. Given in Valence, xv Calendas October, [in the fourth year of our pontificate].93

Though Infante Manuel’s emissary, Opizo or Obizzo, has not yet been identified, we do know that the name, while uncommon in Italy, is found predominantly in the regions of Piedmont and Lombardy and

168

Dawn of a Dynasty

particularly in the province of Savona near Genoa, precisely those ­areas where Alfonso X had garnered the largest number of imperial adherents including the noble members of the Houses of Montferrat and ­Savoy. Since he is referred to as miles, he may well have been one of the proposed company of two hundred knights Manuel planned to muster and lead to the Holy Land. The pontiff’s negative response to the infante’s request was at once gracious and pragmatic. He surely recognized that Manuel was despondent over the recent tragic events in his life and for this reason was probably lacking in true crusading zeal. His assessment and disposition of the situation was realistic and reasonable: this was not the appropriate occasion for Manuel to abandon his brother, and at such time as the Sarracen threat to the Peninsula had been eliminated, he would certainly reconsider the infante’s petition. The king and the pontiff continued to spar with each other concerning the monarch’s disinclination to relinquish the imperial title and perquisites, and on 28 September His Holiness once again addressed the matter with Archbishop Remondo, with whom he was in constant correspondence concerning not only Alfonso’s obstinacy but the infante’s dilemma as well: Moreover, just as you maintain in your letter to us with regard to our dear son, the noble Lord Emanuel, brother of this same king, you attempted to advise and influence the former as well as certain others, whose names are expressed in this same letter, in the presence of the king and according to our instructions. The king also told you, among other things, that he would finally answer you concerning these matters within a fortnight of the feast of Saint Michael.94

The king had promised to render his decision concerning the imperial title and regalia soon after Michaelmas on 29 September, and until then he was obviously engaged in more urgent matters. On 14 October Gregory X, determined to have his way and cognizant of Alfonso’s current physical and financial circumstances, once again offered the king a tenth of all ecclesiastical revenues if he would formally renounce the imperial crown.95 Though we do not have Alfonso’s answer, he must have acceded to the pope’s proposition, since Gregory shortly thereafter issued an announcement to the secular and clerical princes of ­Germany confirming the Castilian’s renunciation.96 Infante Manuel’s problems were no less pressing, and he was in a quandary. Given the pontiff’s refusal to subsidize a crusade to the Holy Land, his most expedient alternative at this juncture would be to remarry as soon as possible, but clearly such matters could not be easily



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

169

or hastily resolved, for his fortunes were subordinate to the political strategies of his brother the king and, in the long run, to the well-being of the realm. At the same time, any new dynastic alliance forged by a marriage he might contrive would have to take into account the precarious position he currently maintained vis-à-vis his former father-in-law, Jaime I of Aragón, whose domains in southeast Spain bordered upon many of his own holdings. Although the infante’s son, Juan Manuel, records in the Chronicon that his father married his mother in the same month he learned of his son Alfonso’s demise, we may be sure that Manuel’s decision to marry Beatrice Contesson of Savoy could not reasonably have been taken until after the pope’s 17 September rejection of his proposed crusade and, as we shall see, in all likelihood during the month of November.97 In fact, Manuel’s marriage to Beatrice was not the only conjugal ­alliance contemplated by the king at this moment. As we have seen, he had married his younger daughter Beatrice to the marquess of Montferrat four years earlier to enhance Ghibelline support of his ­ imperial ambitions in northern Italy, and Manuel’s relationship with Contesson would assure the benevolence of the House of Savoy in his current disputes with Philippe III of France and his uncle, Charles of Anjou. France, then, was emerging as the newest threat to Castile, and it behooved the king to explore any possible links to enhance his relationship with the perennially restive nobility of Languedoc. To this end, on the return trip to Castile in November, he would meet with Aymeri IV, viscount of Narbonne (r. 1270–98), to discuss a marriage between his son Infante Pedro (1260/61–83) and Aymeri’s sister, Marguerite, daughter of Amalric I (r. 1239–70) and Philippa d’Anduze, and a direct descendant of Manrique Pérez de Lara, lord of Molina (d. 1164). The couple was subsequently engaged in Zaragoza during November 1275 and married in Burgos before March 1281.98 In this same context, miniature 34 of the Florentine codex of the Cantigas de Santa Maria, only recently identified by Kinkade and Keller as a graphic representation of Cantiga 235, provides vivid proof of Molinier’s assertion that Aymeri IV and his brothers accompanied Alfonso’s entourage to Zaragoza: in panel two, towards the rear of Alfonso’s retinue as it enters Castile, may be seen, among others, the royal standard of Castile-León, the red and gold ensign of Aragón, and the blue and silver standard of Aymeri of Narbonne.99 The figure in the foreground at far right wearing a helmet with the emblem of Santiago on the crown may well be Infante Manuel himself, the king’s alférez and confrère of the Order (Fig. 25). The hurried negotiations for Infante Manuel’s unforeseen matrimonial alliance with the House of Savoy were occurring precisely when

170

Dawn of a Dynasty

he and the king were apprised of the death of their brother-in-law ­Sancho, archbishop of Toledo and primate of Spain, who had been captured on 20 October during the Battle of Martos in the bishopric of Jaén and summarily beheaded.100 Two days later the Marinid invaders were ­encamped outside the gates of Seville, and it must have seemed to the ­ailing monarch that the situation in the south was getting out of hand. In fact, the CAX claims that Alfonso X feared at this juncture that the whole of Andalusia might be lost.101 News of the battle and the preceding devastation of the countryside around Seville would not have reached the king for at least ten days to two weeks and, had he made a forced march back towards Castile at that time, he could not have a­ rrived on the other side of the Pyrenees before the middle of N ­ ovember 1275. How long, then, did Alfonso and Manuel remain in Montpellier? Royal records are absent from 5 August to 10 December 1275.102 Cantiga 235 together with other historical sources, however, will allow us to reconstruct a reasonable if hypothetical itinerary for this period. The king had suffered a serious relapse of his illness before the conference with Pope Gregory, and the malady had again become life-threatening on his return through Montpellier, where Cantiga 235 asserts he was at death’s doorstep. At some point during his illness, however, when his doctors had given up all hope of recovery, he was miraculously restored to health by the Virgin in a few short days, apparently fit and able to resume his journey to Castile where he would more fully convalesce. Fortunate enough in this crisis to have found himself in a city famed as a European centre of the healing arts, we must suppose that Alfonso would have been prepared to spend any length of time there his physicians felt necessary to effect a lasting cure. Cantiga 235, however, affirms that the Virgin “caused him to be able to ride in a few days / and to go back to his own land to recuperate there; / he passed through Catalonia, where he had to cover great distances each day as one does on a long journey.”103 In the absence of chancery documents concerning the return trip to Castile, we can have recourse to the records chronicling the life of Jaime I, which are more abundant, and from these we know that Alfonso’s ­father-in-law was in Lérida on 24 October and again during 11–14 and 19–26 November.104 Ballesteros suggests that the motive for his trips to that city was to meet with his son-in-law, daughter, and grandchildren as he had during 9–25 June when he travelled to ­Perpignan to visit Queen Violante and her family while Alfonso was in Beaucaire.105 It must have been during either October or November that the monarch learned of the death of his nineteen-year-old daughter Leonor in ­Perpignan, as reported by Bernat Desclot and the Anales toledanos.106 Once again, even



Revolt and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75

171

as it had earlier provided a description of the expedition to Montpellier, Muntaner’s Crónica details Alfonso’s return trip to Castile, pointing out that the king did not pass through Barcelona but travelled directly to Lérida, which would suggest that he took the shorter overland route through the Pyrenees between ­Perpignan and Urgel, a total distance from Perpignan to Lérida of some 250 ­kilometres.107 In this case, we may speculate that he spent five or six days on the road, if he was making a forced march as the Cantiga relates, arriving in Lérida around the middle of November, in time to cross paths with his father-in-law, who was in that city during 11–14 November. The CAX states that on the return trip Alfonso travelled the full length of Catalonia to Valencia and from there west to Requena and then north to Alcalá de Henares.108 This itinerary seems highly unlikely in view of the fact that the population of Valencia and the surrounding territories had taken advantage of the latest Marinid invasion to rise up against Aragonese rule, and the ­political situation in the region at that time was simply too hazardous for the king to have ventured so far south. We must also consider that the earliest royal document to chronicle Alfonso’s presence in Castile after the last diploma signed by him in Montpellier on 5 August is dated 10 December in Brihuega,109 about fifty kilometres to the northeast of Alcalá de Henares, while the next royal document, dated 17 December, was issued in Alcalá itself, a sure indication that the king was travelling south from Lérida and not north from Valencia, as the CAX relates. The king and Infante Manuel would remain in Alcalá until 1 January 1276.110 In the interim, the main Marinid invasion forces had surrounded ­Seville but without heavy siege machinery were unable to breach the city walls. Stymied in their hopes for conquest and threatened with a naval blockade organized by seventeen-year-old Infante Sancho that would eventually cut off their supplies, the invaders were content to pillage the countryside and retreat at leisure.111 By the middle of ­November Abu Yusuf’s troops had returned to Algeciras with enough booty from a devastated Andalusia to warrant the initiation of peace talks, which were duly concluded by the end of December with the active intervention of Infante Sancho, whose newly minted reputation as a skilful warrior and negotiator would henceforth warrant him as a serious contender for the throne. Arriving in Alcalá de Henares after the middle of December, the king and Infante Manuel must have spent a bleak Christmas there, s­ obered by the death of their sons Fernando and Alfonso, the passing of ­Infanta Leonor and the loss of their brother-in-law Archbishop Sancho. Pope Gregory’s 15 October 1275 proclamation to the princes of Europe

172

Dawn of a Dynasty

announcing Alfonso’s abdication of the Holy Roman crown had forever extinguished his cherished dreams of empire, while the pontiff’s passing in December effectively precluded any further attempts to ­revisit the papal decision. In the meantime, the historical links ­joining the houses of Castile-León and Savoy and the remarkable circumstances leading to the marriage of Manuel and Beatrice are worthy of our ­careful consideration.

6 The House of Savoy: 1275

Infante Manuel’s decision to join his fortunes with those of the House of Savoy by marrying Beatrice Contesson was neither impulsive nor hastily conceived, as Juan Manuel’s Latin chronicle seems to suggest: “And Infante Don Manuel’s son Alfonso died in Montpellier and he married the countess in the same month.”1 On the contrary, the union was historically appropriate and carefully weighed by both parties as a natural extension of several dynastic determinations already taken by the Castilian royal family in the immediate past. In fact, Manuel’s ­marriage provides us with a unique opportunity to survey the broader dimensions and implications of royal relationships in thirteenth-­century Europe and is thus central to our understanding of Alfonso’s foreign policy at that moment in time. Ballesteros assumes the match was made to ensure Infante Manuel had a masculine descendant,2 while Lomax merely affirms that we have no facts concerning either the marriage or its motive.3 Even Ayala Martínez, whose otherwise accurate assessment of Alfonso’s imperial pretentions we would expect to include some analysis of Manuel’s marriage, merely echoes ­Ballesteros.4 Nevertheless, Manuel’s connection with the House of Savoy was certainly deliberate, and a review of the history of the role of the Savoyards in the political drama that was being played out at that time will provide us with the answers we seek (Fig. 26). Prior to the advent of Thomas I (1177–1233), the counts of Savoy had been confined to a rather minor role in the politics of Europe. Thomas, married to Marguerite de Faucigny (d. 1258), was the grandfather of Beatrice of Savoy, the great-grandfather of Juan Manuel, and would be the first to realize the Savoyard dream of a unified transalpine state. At the beginning of his forty-four-year reign in 1189, Thomas’s considerable feudal domains north and west of the Alps included the counties of Savoy, Maurienne, and Chablais, and on the Italian side of the Alps he

174

Dawn of a Dynasty

was count of Aosta and marquess of Susa. By the end of his life in 1233, however, his authority would not be measured so much by territorial gains as by the various marriages and ecclesiastical posts he had successfully transacted for his eight surviving offspring, whose influence was later to be felt throughout the courts of Europe, and with considerable consequences for the royal family of Castile-León.5 The eldest son and heir of Count Thomas, Amadeus IV (1197–1253), was first married in 1223 to Anne Marguerite of Burgundy and d’Albon (1192–1242), daughter of Hugh III, duke of Burgundy (1148–92) and Beatrice d’Albon (1161–1229). Their eldest daughter, Beatrice of Savoy (1224–59), married Manfred III of Saluzzo (d. 1244), and following his death was wed in 1248 to Manfred Hohenstaufen (1232–66), the illegitimate son of the emperor Frederick II, whose brief reign as king of the two Sicilies ended with his death at the Battle of Benevento in 1266.6 Their daughter, Constance of Sicily (1249–1302), later married Pedro, son of Jaime I of Aragón, who would become Pedro III (1240; r. 1276–85) upon the demise of his father and Alfonso X’s father-in-law. The ­Hohenstaufen connection was hardly new and had been established in 1209 when Frederick II married Constanza de Aragón, the sister of Pedro II and thus Jaime I’s paternal aunt. The second daughter of Anne Marguerite and Amadeus IV, Marguerite of Savoy (1225–54), married Boniface II of Montferrat (1202–53). The son of this union, William VII of Montferrat (1240–92), married ­Beatrice (1254–86), daughter of Alfonso X, in Murcia (August 1271)7 following the death of his first wife Isabel (1240–71), daughter of Richard, earl of Cornwall.8 William VII and Isabel had a daughter, Marguerite of ­Montferrat, who in 1272 married Infante Juan (1264–1319), son of Alfonso X el Sabio.9 In 1242, two years after the death of his first wife, Anne Marguerite of Burgundy, Amadeus IV married Cecile des Baux (c. 1230–75), daughter of Barral des Baux (1210–68) and his wife Sybille d’Anduze (c. 1212–c. 1279), daughter of Bertrand VIII d’Anduze (c. 1189–1223) and Vierne de Chateauneuf (1185–1223), who was also the niece of Raymond VII, count of Toulouse (1197–1249). This marriage resulted in two children, Boniface of Savoy (c. 1248–63) and Beatrice Contesson (c. 1250–90), future bride of Infante Manuel and mother of Juan Manuel. Around 1325, the Catalan chronicler Ramon Muntaner, tracing the ancestry of the kings of Aragon, called the Baux family “la pus antiga casa e la pus honrrada de Prohença, e parents que son del senyor rey Darago.”10 The other seven children of Count Thomas of Savoy made equally advantageous alliances. His eldest daughter, Beatrice of Savoy (c. 1205–66), was married in 1220 to Ramon Berenguer V (1195–1245),



The House of Savoy: 1275

175

count and marquess of Provence.11 Ramon, the son of Garsenda de Sabran-Forcalquier and Alfonso II of Provence, younger brother of ­Pedro II of Aragón, was first cousin to Pedro’s young son, Jaime I, with whom he had been raised and who had inherited the crown of Aragón in 1213. The eldest daughter of Ramon and Beatrice, Marguerite of Provence (c. 1221–95), subsequently became queen of France when she married Louis IX in 1234. Two years later, their second daughter Eleanor of Provence (1223–91) married Henry III of England and was accompanied to London by her uncle, William of Savoy, bishop-elect of Valence, who soon became Henry’s most trusted advisor.12 Their third ­daughter, Sancha of Provence (1228–61), was married in 1243 to Richard Earl of Cornwall, the brother of Henry III. Beatrice of Provence (1234–67), the youngest daughter of Ramon and Beatrice, was married in 1246 to Charles of Anjou (1226–85), future King of Sicily.13 Dante recognized the importance of these four daughters of Ramon and Beatrice when he mentioned them in the Divina Commedia, ascribing their marriages to the efforts of Ramon’s minister Romeo of Villeneuve.14 ­Significantly, when the Hohenstaufen emperor Frederick II launched his Lombard campaign in 1237 to restore ecclesiastical and imperial rights in northern Italy, the members of the House of Savoy were among the first of those who hastened to join the ranks of his Ghibelline supporters. ­Indeed, Amadeus IV, Count Thomas’ heir, was said to have been knighted by Frederick in 1238.15 Located geographically as gatekeepers of the Alps between the imperialist forces in Germany and the papacy in Italy, the House of Savoy found its destiny inextricably tied to the ongoing conflict between these two spiritual and secular powers. When William of Savoy died in 1240, Henry III had become so infatuated with his Savoyard relatives, in whom he perceived the chance to recover the territories his father had lost in southern France, that he issued an open invitation to William’s brothers to take up residence in England. Three of them responded, and the following year Peter of Savoy became the recipient of the lands and revenues of the earldom of Richmond;16 Boniface of Savoy was elected archbishop of Canterbury and primate of England;17 while Philippe of Savoy, the youngest of the brothers, was confirmed in several substantial ecclesiastical benefices.18 A year later, eager to support the growing anti-French coalition of Count Raymond de Toulouse and secure Provençal support, Henry despatched Peter and Philippe to arrange a marriage between their niece Sancha of Provence, the younger sister of Queen Eleanor, and the king’s brother, Earl Richard of Cornwall, a union duly consummated in 1243.19 Meanwhile, in 1237 another brother, Thomas II of Savoy (1199–1259), had married Jeanne, daughter of Baldwin I, emperor of Constantinople

176

Dawn of a Dynasty

and the ninth count of Flanders and Hainaut, assuming upon his death the title to these prosperous counties that were also fiefs of the French crown. Through his niece Marguerite of Provence, Thomas was at once a vassal of Louis IX and the king’s uncle.20 As the ruler of Flanders and Hainaut, essential centres of distribution for the thriving English wool trade, and uncle of Henry III, who had married Thomas’s niece Eleanor, the count was a welcome visitor at the English court, where in 1239 he payed homage to the king, receiving in the bargain a fief-rent of five hundred marks per year.21 While his younger brothers sojourned in England and Thomas fortified his position in France, Amadeus IV, now patriarch of the House of Savoy, remained in the Savoyard feudal territories, where he was actively engaged in defending the family’s political and economic interests. When his first wife, Marguerite d’Albon, died in 1242, Count ­Amadeus sought a marital alliance with Raymond VII, count of T ­ oulouse, through his lieutenant in the Marquisate of Provence, ­Barral des Baux, lord of Avignon, whose wife, Sybille d’Anduze, was ­Raymond’s niece.22 Their eldest daughter, Cecile des Baux, surnamed “Passerose,” was obviously chosen as much for her beauty as for the political advantage she brought to this union. The fifteenth-century chronicler Jehan Servion, writing sometime between 1417 and 1420, recalls that she was “very wise ... possessed of all good mores, and constant in the manners and conditions attendant upon a young maiden.”23 Count Raymond promised a dowry of six thousand solidi viennois, and the marriage was duly celebrated at Orange in January 1244.24 Servion records that it was a proxy marriage with the groom’s younger brother, Peter of Savoy, standing in for Count Amadeus.25 The couple’s first child, Boniface, was born in December 1244, and Infante Manuel’s future wife, Beatrice, also known as “Contesse” or “Contesson,” came into the world about six years later in 1250.26 No precise birthdates have yet been found for either.27 The description of Boniface offered by Servion describes him as “large of body, furnished with powerful limbs, well formed, tall and straight, a marvellously handsome and pleasant man, haughty and of great courage, proud and refined, wise, cautious and sly; and in his time there was no one who surpassed him in strength wherefore he was called by many the second Roland.”28 In lieu of any other portrayal of his sister, Servion’s description serves to give us an idea of the physical features of Beatrice, who no doubt was as beautiful as her mother, Cecile des Beaux. Though the Savoyards, their brothers-in-law the marquesses of Saluzzo and Montferrat, and their new relative Raymond VII, count of Toulouse, had previously affirmed their staunch allegiance to Emperor



The House of Savoy: 1275

177

Frederick II during his campaign against the Lombard League in 1237, they all began to waiver in their loyalty when Gregory IX excommunicated the emperor in May 1239. Following Gregory’s death soon ­after and Frederick’s subsequent attempts to capture Innocent IV in the spring of 1244, obliging the new pope to abandon Italy, both Amadeus and his brother Philippe rallied to the pontiff’s support, and with their help he was able to escape to the safety of Lyon. At the conclusion of the Council of Lyon the following year, a grateful pope would bestow upon Philippe the archbishopric of that city, where the Holy Father remained in exile until the death of Emperor Frederick in 1250.29 At this point, the geographical circumstances of the House of Savoy, straddling the Alps between Provence and the Piedmont and situated precisely between the imperialist forces to the east and the papacy in exile to the west in Lyon, inevitably thrust the five Savoyard brothers into an ideological struggle between the empire and the pope. In the midst of this political maelstrom during the year 1245, the count of Provence, Ramon Berenguer V, died, leaving the county and title to his nineteen-year-old daughter Beatrice. Given the critical importance of Provence at this juncture, Frederick II was determined to secure her hand for his son Conrad IV, king of Germany (1228, r. 1237–54), and to this end despatched a fleet to Marseilles with orders to capture the young heiress while simultaneously threatening to invade Provence from the north. There is even some evidence to suggest that Jaime I, king of Aragón, sent an army into the Rhône Valley to take ­Beatrice into custody for the purpose of marrying her to his own son Pedro (1239, r. 1276–85), but Pedro was only six years old at the time and the claim is difficult to support.30 In a curious document that ­Ballesteros was not aware of, Frederick II writes to Infante Alfonso, future monarch of ­Castile, that in response to the latter’s question concerning the countess of Provence, he has sent his messenger to the master of the Order of the Hospitallers with certain information.31 Infante Alfonso’s enigmatic query indicates his early concern with the politics of Provence, and a certain realization of the importance of that area and its ruling families that would, in time, lead to his own attempts to forge a link with these powers. Jaime’s feudal connections with Provence were underscored when, on 17 July 1258, he relinquished all claims to Provence, Forcalquier, Arles, Avignon, and Marseilles to his relative Marguerite, queen of France and her son Philippe.32 Because of the ongoing struggle between France and England, which had resulted in the marriage of Henry III to Eleanor of Provence and of his brother Richard, earl of Cornwall to her sister, Sancha, the two older daughters of Beatrice and Ramon Berenguer V, both Henry and Richard had also made their

178

Dawn of a Dynasty

own demands in the matter, claiming not to have received all of their promised dowries from Count Ramon. In order to prevent Provence from falling into the hands of his enemies, Innocent IV appealed to Louis IX who, prompted by his own interests in the affair, swiftly proposed a marriage between his youngest brother Charles of Anjou and the young heiress Beatrice. The royal French chronicler Guillaume de Nangis states that Beatrice was subsequently rescued by Charles and the Savoyard brothers Amadeus, Philippe, and Thomas, who were duly present at her wedding to Charles on 31 January 1246.33 Having failed to secure the marriage of Conrad and Beatrice of Provence, Frederick II, eager to establish an alliance with the House of Savoy and to block the advance of Charles of Anjou in Provence, now turned to another Beatrice, the widow of Manfred III of Saluzzo (d. 1244), the second daughter of Amadeus IV and Marguerite and half-sister of Beatrice, future wife of Infante Manuel. Frederick II proposed that she marry his illegitimate son Manfred Hohenstaufen, who would be enfeoffed with the kingdom of Arles to include western ­Lombardy, from the eastern slopes of the Alps to Pavia and the entire region between the western Alps and the Rhone, from Savoy to the Mediterranean. The prospect for Amadeus of such a vast array of territories for his daughter and the protection it would provide the House of Savoy against the predatory ambitions of Charles of Anjou, the new son-in-law of his widowed sister Beatrice, countess of Provence, was compelling, and the marriage was duly celebrated in 1248. Count ­Amadeus was thus firmly ensconced in the anti-papal Hohenstaufen camp, as was his eldest brother Thomas, whom Frederick had recently named imperial vicar of Lombardy north of the Po. On the other hand, their younger, ecclesiastical brothers Boniface and Peter of Savoy continued to support the pope in exile in Lyon. A tenuous resolution of the familial conflict occurred on 13 December 1250 when Frederick’s death precipitated a rapid disintegration of the old papal and imperial alliances with important consequences for the House of Savoy. With the disappearance of the emperor and the triumphant emergence of Innocent IV from exile, the communes, city states, and feudal domains on both sides of the Alps now rushed to seek some type of rapprochement with the pontiff and pro-papal factions. In the summer of 1253, during this period of reconstruction, Amadeus IV died at ­Montmélian. His will left young Boniface, then scarcely three or four years old, under the tutelage of his uncle Thomas, who would also be his successor should he die without issue.34 Beatrice Contesson, the youngest daughter of ­Amadeus and future bride of Infante Manuel, was to be placed in the convent of Le Betton, where the count indicated



The House of Savoy: 1275

179

he wished to be buried: “Volo et precipio quod Beatrix filia mea minor intret m ­ onasterum Bittuminis et ibidem sit monialis et pro ipsa ibidem recipienda et sepultura mea et pro remedio anime mee et parentum meorum dono et lego domui Bittuminis ubi sepulturam meam eligo et sepeleri volo.”35 A significant bequest, including “omnia alia monilia mea et joeria,” was left to the convent for the repose of his soul and the maintenance of his daughter, though he was ultimately interred at Hautecombe.36 Countess Cecile des Baux was given all the properties currently in her possession, and her original dower lands were increased to include the castellanies of Montemélian, La Rochette, and Tarentaise.37 When Boniface II of Montferrat died a day after ­Amadeus, Thomas II of Savoy was named regent for his son, nine-year-old ­William VII of Montferrat, Amadeus’s grandson and the future son-inlaw of Alfonso X. The reign of Count Boniface (1253–63) was short and largely uneventful given his extreme youth and the fact that the political and financial affairs of his domain were largely controlled by his uncle Thomas and his mother, Countess Cecile, who most likely assumed the regency in Savoy following the death of Thomas in 1259.38 Boniface never married and had no children. At his death in 1263, according to Servion, “he left none but his sister, Contense, who was not yet married and could not succeed the count because the constitution of Savoy would not allow a female to inherit.”39 We do not know exactly when he died, but his uncle and successor Peter II of Savoy first received homage from his Savoyard vassals on 11 June 1263.40 We may safely assume that, over the years, the sons and daughters of Count Thomas of Savoy were no strangers to the king of Castile, especially the Savoyards who had so successfully established themselves at the court of Henry III of England: Peter of Savoy, earl of Richmond, and his brother Boniface, archbishop of Canterbury. In 1253, Alfonso X encouraged a revolt against the English in Gascony with his support of the rebel leader Gaston VII de Montcada, viscount of Béarn (1221, r. 1229–90).41 Gaston was the son of Guillem II de Montcada, viscount of Béarn and lord of Montcada and Castelvell (1223–29), one of Jaime I’s most powerful Catalan vassals, who had perished in the conquest of Mallorca. Gaston’s mother was Garsenda de Forcalquier, sister of ­Ramon Berenguer IV, count of Provence, husband of Contesson’s aunt, Beatrice of Savoy, and father of Eleanor of Provence, wife of Henry III. The English king preferred to seek a diplomatic solution, and on 24  May 1253 proposed a marriage between his eldest son Edward and Alfonso’s half-sister Leonor, daughter of Fernando III and Jeanne de Ponthieu.42

180

Dawn of a Dynasty

An agreement reached by both monarchs on 31 March and 20 April 1254 stipulated that Alfonso X would cede his rights in Gascony to Edward, whom he would then knight in a public ceremony symbolic of the young prince’s implied fealty and would, in turn, receive a promise of Edward’s military assistance to support the objectives of Castile in Navarre.43 The last clause of the contract had significant implications for Infante Manuel because the English king’s ambassadors had also agreed to a marriage between Beatrice, Henry’s fourteen-year-old daughter, and one of Alfonso’s brothers: “quod idem Dominus Rex det filiam suam praefato Regi Castellae & Legionis, maritandam uni ex Fratribus suis germanis cui voluerit.” Henry III confirmed a similar promise in a separate document dated that same day.44 That Infante Manuel was the intended groom is not revealed until a year later when Henry mentions him specifically in a missive despatched to his most trusted clerk, John Mansel, sometime in October-November 1255, informing him that he had conferred on the matter with his brother Richard of Cornwall.45 Meanwhile, Boniface of Savoy, the archbishop of Canterbury and one of Henry’s most trusted advisors, was intimately involved in the treaty arrangements between the two nations and, with his niece, Edward’s mother, accompanied the fifteen-year-old heir to the throne when he journeyed through Gascony in June 1254 on his way to Burgos where he would wed Alfonso’s sister Leonor five months later.46 Another attempt was consequently undertaken to forge a Savoyard connection with the Castilian monarchy when in March 1266 an arrangement was made for Infante Manuel and his young son Alfonso to marry Constance and Guillelma, the daughters of Gaston VII de M ­ ontcada, viscount of Béarn and the nephew of Contesson’s aunt, B ­ eatrice of ­Savoy. Constance de Béarn had married Alfonso de Aragón, son of Jaime I and his first wife Leonor of Castile, in 1256 and was ­widowed at Alfonso’s death in 1260.47 Manuel’s late spouse, Constanza de Aragón, had expired a few months earlier in January or February of 1266. An extant document stipulating the contractual terms of the agreement, including a dowry of 100,000 maravedís, is dated 12 March in Seville, but the marriages never took place for lack of papal dispensation. In 1291 Guillelma was wed to Infante Pedro, the youngest son of Pedro III of Aragón and his wife Constance of Sicily, daughter of ­Manfred ­Hohenstaufen.48 In 1273, following the death of his first wife Amata, Gaston VII, viscount of Béarn, married Beatrice of Vienne-­Albon, the widowed daughter of Peter II of Savoy and Beatrice de ­Faucigny, whose previous husband, Guigues VII, dauphin of Viennois, had died three years earlier.49 ­Beatrice had inherited not only the ­dauphiné from her husband but also considerable property rights from her father, Peter II of Savoy. Count Philippe, the new head of the House of Savoy, now saw



The House of Savoy: 1275

181

that it would be clearly to his advantage to remove her from the scene by arranging her marriage to the viscount of Béarn. ­Gaston continued to confirm royal chancery documents as Alfonso’s vassal until at least August 1274.50 While Alfonso was attempting to forge these alliances with the Moncadas of Cataluña and Béarn in pursuit of his long-range plans to bring Navarre within the political sphere of Castile, Jaime I sought to counteract this move and strengthen his own ties with the House of Savoy. Jaime I’s political strategy since 1256 had been dictated by the need to oppose his son-in-law’s imperial pretensions in both the Iberian ­Peninsula and the Mediterranean. His first open step taken in this context was a marriage proposal in 1260 between his son and heir, Pedro, and Constance, the twelve-year-old daughter of Beatrice of Savoy, ­Contesson’s half-sister, and Manfred Hohenstaufen, Alfonso’s recognized rival in Italy for the crown of the Holy Roman Empire.51 Constance’s dowry would include substantial rents from Catalan properties near the Pyrenees and were thus dependent on continued good relations with the Savoyards.52 In spite of Alfonso’s strenuous objections, the marriage took place in Montpellier on 13 June 1262. One month later, Jaime I achieved yet another diplomatic victory over his Castilian rival with the marriage of his daughter Isabel to Crown Prince Philippe, son of Louis IX of France. This union was also calculated to erode the influence of Charles of Anjou, count of Provence, whose territorial ambitions in the south of France had increasingly loomed as a threat to both the Aragonese and the Savoyards alike. Scarcely a year later, on 5 May 1263, the Aragonese monarch attempted to forge yet another link in his anti-Angevine strategy when he appointed his relative Guillén de Rocafull to arrange a marriage between his son Jaime de Mallorca and Beatrice Contesson, the daughter of the deceased Count Amadeus of Savoy and half-sister of Beatrice of Savoy, wife of Manfred Hohenstaufen and mother-in-law of Jaime’s heir apparent, Pedro.53 Contesson’s brother Count Boniface had died about this same time, and the king may have surmised that even though she had renounced her claims to the Savoyard domains, his younger son, Jaime de Mallorca, might somehow renew them under the current circumstances. Though Amadeus IV’s final testament had assigned the comital succession to his brother Thomas and his sons should Boniface expire without issue, Thomas had died in 1259 and his eldest sons were only ten or eleven years old at the time. Peter II of Savoy, however, acted swiftly to usurp the title for himself, pre-empting any designs Jaime I may have had on the County of Savoy, and thus nothing ever came of the Aragonese plans for a marriage between Jaime de Mallorca and Beatrice Contesson.54

182

Dawn of a Dynasty

By 1265, Charles of Anjou had raised an army in Lyon in preparation for his triumphant campaign against Manfred and Sicily, achieving a swift and crushing defeat of the Ghibelline forces on 26 February 1266 in the Battle of Benevento, where Manfred lost his life. Alarmed by these events, which at once posed a grave danger to the plans he had so carefully fashioned for his son Pedro and his Sicilian bride, Constance, and now threatened to upset the balance of power in southeast France, the king of Aragón once again proposed a marriage between his son Jaime de Mallorca and Beatrice Contesson, who had resided since her father’s death at the abbey of Le Betton located to the north of ­Chambery on the shores of Lake Bourget.55 The details of the second marriage proposal between Contesson and Jaime de Majorca are preserved in a document dated 15 July 1266 in which the Aragonese despatches his royal procurators, Guillén de ­Rocafull, and the royal notary, Miquel Violeta, to negotiate the union with Peter II of Savoy, dynastic head of the Savoyards, pledging on Jaime’s behalf the sum of £10,000 tournois payable to Peter II and his niece in exchange for the County of Roussillon from whose annual rents Beatrice would receive £1,500 to cover her personal expenses.56 The negotiations, however, were again unproductive, and though we possess no details in this regard, it may be surmised that Peter, now old and infirm, considered it more prudent to avoid the open confrontation such a coalition was bound to provoke in Charles of Anjou, especially while the House of Savoy was currently in a state of open hostilities with Rudolf of Habsburg for control of western Helvetia.57 Though the projected marriage of Beatrice of Savoy to Jaime de Mallorca failed to materialize in 1266, her son, Juan Manuel, established the connection in 1300 when he wed Jaime’s daughter, Isabel.58 As Peter, patriarch of the Savoyard clan, neared the end of his days, his brother and heir, Philippe, bishop of Valence, archbishop-elect of Lyon, and the youngest of the seven sons of Count Thomas, began to envision a transition from an ecclesiastical career to one more in consonance with the political demands of the County of Savoy. Resigning his clerical posts, facilitated by the fact that he had never been ordained, Philippe married the recently widowed countess-palatine of Burgundy, Alix of Merano, on 3 June 1267 in Lausanne. This union, and the death of Peter in May 1268, were to set the stage for a marriage in October of that year between the niece of Peter and Philippe, Beatrice Contesson, and Pierre de Chalon, brother-in-law of Alix of Merano. This connection between the Savoyards, the counts-palatine of ­Burgundy, and the counts of Chalon requires some clarification. Pierre de Chalon, though a minor player in the political context of the times,



The House of Savoy: 1275

183

was by no means an insignificant figure in terms of his genealogy. In the several documents we have by him, he refers to himself as “Pierre de Chalon dit Boviers.”59 On his father’s side, Pierre was a direct descendant of the emperor Frederick I Barbarossa (1122; r. 1152–90). His great-grandfather, Guillaume IV de Thiern and count of Chalon (c. 1120–1202), was married in 1173 to Beatrice of Swabia, daughter of Frederick I and Beatrice, countess of Burgundy. Their daughter, Beatrice de Thiern and countess of Chalon (1174–1257), was married in 1186 to Etienne III of Burgundy (1170–1240), count of Auxonne, Pierre de Chalon’s grandfather. Their son, Jean I “le Sage” (1190–1267), count-palatine of Burgundy, count of Chalon, viscount of Auxonne, and lord of Salins (1237–67), was Pierre’s father. In 1237, Jean le Sage ceded the counties and titles of Auxonne and Chalon to Hugh IV, duke of Burgundy, in exchange for Hugh’s possessions in the Franche-Comté: Salins, Ornans, Vuillafans, Val de Miège, and Les Clées. For the next thirty years, Jean made a fortune developing the saltworks at Salins.60 During this time he had sixteen children with three wives.61 Pierre de Chalon, known as Pierre Bovier, was the fourth of eleven children Jean had with his second wife, Isabel of Courtenay, daughter of Robert I of Courtenay, and, as such, was directly related to Constanza, Infante Manuel’s first spouse, and her older sister Violante de Aragón, wife of Alfonso X.62 The eldest son of Jean le Sage with his first wife, Matilda of B ­ urgundy, was Hugh (1220–66), count-palatine of Burgundy and count of Chalon. Hugh, Pierre de Chalon’s half-brother, was married in 1248 to Alix of Merano who, a year after Hugh’s death in 1266, was married to Philippe of Savoy, Beatrice “Contesson’s” uncle, who now acquired the title of count-palatine of Burgundy. The marriage of Contesson and Pierre de Chalon in 1268, then, was largely motivated by several political considerations. When Hartmann the Younger, count of Kyburg, died in 1263, Count Peter of Savoy attempted to take advantage of Hartmann’s widow, ­Elizabeth of Chalon, and annex the late count’s domains in western Helvetia. Peter was resisted by Hugh de Chalon, Elizabeth’s father and Pierre de Chalon’s half-brother. Count Peter, through his extensive influence in England, managed to have the emperor-elect of Germany, Richard of Cornwall, invest him with the Kyburg inheritance, and this provoked Hugh de Chalon to support Rudolf of Habsburg in a war against Peter that lasted for the next four years.63 When Hugh de Chalon died in 1266, his widow, Alix of Merano, soon found her inheritance of the county-palatine of Burgundy contested by her brother-in-law Hugh IV, duke of Burgundy. Hugh IV was one of the first of the French

184

Dawn of a Dynasty

nobility to recognize Alfonso X’s claim to the Holy Roman Empire and had become his vassal in 1258.64 Hugh was also supported in this endeavour by Pierre de Chalon’s older brother, Jean de Chalon-Rochefort (c. 1243–1309), the first son of Jean le Sage and Isabel of Courtenay, and perhaps by Pierre himself.65 When Peter II of Savoy died in May 1268, leaving Contesson a substantial dowry,66 his successor, Count Philippe, sought to strengthen his dynastic position in the County of Savoy with a marital alliance ­between Pierre de Chalon, brother-in-law of his wife Alix, and his niece, ­Beatrice Contesson of Savoy. As Servion remarks in his fifteenth-century ­chronicle, Contesson, the sister of Count Boniface who had died in 1263, could not inherit the County of Savoy but she might have found a husband who would be willing to assert her claims to the domain, and Philippe would forestall such a possibility by her marriage to Pierre, his new in-law.67 Pierre and Contesson were united on 21 October 1268 at Belley. The marriage contract stipulated that Pierre would settle one-half of his possessions on Contesson in exchange for a dowry of £6,000 viennois. Contesson was obliged to renounce her rights to the County of Savoy in favour of her uncle, Philippe, with the approval of her ­husband and her mother, Cecile des Baux.68 Three years later in ­ December 1271, when Count Philippe lay gravely ill, Pierre was opposed by a coalition of his cousins, the Savoyard brothers Tomasino, Amadeus, and Louis, sons of the late Count Thomas, and Philippe’s nephews, among whom he had made plans to divide his domain. The cousins feared Pierre might attempt to assert Contesson’s claim to the County of ­Savoy, a move that the infirm count had hoped to avoid.69 Surprisingly, Jean de Chalon-Rochefort, Pierre’s older brother, also joined the ­coalition against his sibling.70 Nothing came of the alliance and Pierre de Chalon died “asses ioyne homme”71 sometime between 21 July 1272, the date of his last will and testament, and 29 April 1274, when the ­castle of ­Bletterans, which he formerly held from his liege lord Otto IV of ­Burgundy, was given to the widow of Jean de Chalon.72 Pierre’s testament is a valuable document that provides us with a great deal of information concerning the dynastic status and financial resources of the couple.73 The text is dated Bisuntina, 21 July 1272, and is given by “Petrus de Cabilone dictus Boverius,” indicating that Pierre and Contesson were most likely residing in Besançon, seat of the comté or county-palatine of Burgundy, and incidentally that Pierre was not, as he is often called, count of Chalon.74 He appoints as executors ­“venerabiliem patrem dominum, Dei gratia, archiepiscopum ­Bisuntinum” and his liege lord, Otto IV, count of Chalon, “dominum



The House of Savoy: 1275

185

meum.”75 His older brothers Jean de Chalon, count of Auxerre and lord of Rochefort and Saint-Aignan, and Etienne de Bourgogne, lord of ­Rouvres and Montenot, are to inherit should Beatrice die without issue.76 From the text, we can deduce that Beatrice’s title, “Contesson,” was ultimately derived not from her marriage but from her status as the legitimate countess of Savoy, though she had renounced her claims to the title when she married Pierre. Beatrice was designated to inherit, “secundum usus Burgundie,” all that she had received as dower properties from her husband and one-half of his worldly goods, “medietatem omnium bonorum meorum.” In addition, she was to collect the rents from the saltworks at Salins plus £6,000 viennois annually: all in all, a very handsome sum. Pierre also designates as his heirs any unborn children, making clear that he did not at that time have any descendants, nor do we find that any were born before he died, as Servion relates in his chronicle.77 When Contesson’s mother, Cecile des Baux, paid her debt to nature in La Rochette on 21 May 1275, Count Philippe quickly annexed her holdings in Val d’Isère.78 It must certainly have occurred to Philippe that his young niece, about twenty-three at the time, now posed a potential threat to the balance of power he had so assiduously established in the region with the apportionment of his demesne among his three nephews Tomasino, Amadeus, and Louis, the sons of his late brother Count Thomas. He was surrounded on all sides by powerful figures with political pretensions to the Savoyard territories. Hugh IV, duke of B ­ urgundy was anxious to make good on his claims to the county-palatine of Burgundy, which Philippe had acquired at the death of Hugh of Chalon and his marriage to Hugh’s widow, Alix of Merano. Rudolf of Habsburg had been chosen emperor-elect of Germany by the diet of German princes at Frankfurt a year after the death of Richard of Cornwall in 1272 and was now, more than ever, in an advantageous position to renew the struggle over the contested Kyburg territories in western Helvetia. Since 1269, Philippe’s grand-nephew, William VII, marquess of Montferrat, had revived his father’s claims in the P ­ iedmont to those possessions Amadeus IV had willed to Boniface and B ­ eatrice Contesson, and the following year renounced his allegiance to Charles of Anjou to embrace the cause of the new Ghibelline champion in northern Italy, Alfonso X of Castile.79 William, of course, was Contesson’s nephew, the son of her half-sister Marguerite and Boniface II of Montferrat. The Castilian monarch had been so taken with his new ally, William, that he promptly made plans to have the marquess wed his ­daughter ­Beatrice, promising the groom a yearly stipend of two thousand marks.80 The two were married in Murcia in August 1271, and William would

186

Dawn of a Dynasty

later pledge to betroth his daughter, Marguerite, to Alfonso’s third son, Infante Juan (1264–1319), who would succeed him in the marquisate of Montferrat should the marquess die without issue. Among the witnesses to this contract was Infante Manuel.81 The marquess would also lead an expeditionary force of two thousand men-at-arms into Lombardy to support the king’s anti-Angevine followers in that area. ­Alfonso X was intent on forging still other marital alliances at this time, which would include a union between one of his daughters, ­either ­Violante or Leonor, and Count Philippe’s nephew Tomasino, ­eldest son of the late Count Thomas II of Savoy.82 The following month, William VII of Montferrat was appointed Alfonso’s imperial viceroy in ­Lombardy and Italy.83 In January 1272, he returned home with his new wife, ­Beatrice, and a dowry of £40,000 tournois.84 The marriage between Contesson’s cousin Tomasino and one of Alfonso’s daughters never took place. Several reasons present themselves. Count Philippe of Savoy could not afford to alienate his royal great-nephew, the new king of France, Philippe III, by allying himself with the ruler of Castile, who was openly antagonistic to Charles of Anjou, Philippe’s uncle. At the same time, William VII, marquess of Montferrat, had been named Alfonso’s viceroy for Lombardy and Italy, and a Savoyard marriage with another of Alfonso’s daughters would relegate the House of Savoy to a subordinate position in the imperial hierarchy, beneath the marquess. Meanwhile, the unexpected demise of Richard of Cornwall on 2 April 1272 had renewed Alfonso’s expectations of obtaining the Holy Roman crown, but he was quickly opposed by two new contenders: Rudolf of Habsburg, arch enemy of the House of Savoy, and King Philippe III of France, who had been persuaded by his uncle, Charles of Anjou, to seek the title for himself. Under the circumstances, Count Philippe of ­Savoy would have prudently delayed any decision to marry his nephew, ­Tomasino, to Alfonso’s daughter but, as the leader of the Savoyards, he must have approved the marriage in 1273 of one of Alfonso’s closest retainers, Gaston de Béarn, to his niece and Contesson’s first cousin, Beatrice, the widowed daughter of the late Count Peter II of Savoy. Any prospects of a union with the House of Savoy were dashed a year later in 1274 when Tomasino married Guia de Bourgogne, daughter of the late Hugh de Chalon and Alix of Merano, who had become Count Philippe’s wife in 1267. In the meantime, Alfonso X was determined to pursue the matter of empire and to meet with Pope Gregory in spite of the pontiff’s confirmation of Rudolf of Habsburg and his patent disapproval of the ­Castilian monarch’s incorrigible obstinance. Alfonso clearly must have had other



The House of Savoy: 1275

187

objectives in mind when he demanded an audience with Gregory X in the spring of 1275, an interview to which, though thoroughly opposed, His Holiness could hardly do other than accede given Alfonso’s powerful alliance with the anti-Angevin forces in Lombardy and the pontiff’s express desire to undertake a new crusade in the Levant. In fact, Alfonso still insisted upon his rights to the Duchy of Swabia and ­correctly surmised that the pope could also be of assistance in neutralizing the growing Franco-Navarrese coalition against Castile. Furthermore, Gregory X was in a position to grant the king monetary support in the form of ecclesiastical revenues. Alfonso and Infante Manuel arrived in Beaucaire around the middle of May, where negotiations with the pontiff began almost immediately and would continue until the end of July. The last document signed by Alfonso in Beaucaire is dated 20 July 1275, but Gregory would not depart from there until shortly after 4 September. While in Beaucaire, Alfonso received word sometime in early June that the vanguard of a new Muslim invasion had disembarked in Tarifa on 13 May, and two months later he would learn of the sudden death of his son and heir, Fernando de la Cerda, on 24–25 July. Alfonso and Manuel probably ­returned to Montpellier at the beginning of August, where, according to Cantiga 235, the king fell gravely ill and almost died. There, too, he was informed of the tragic death of his daughter Leonor, in Perpignan and must have witnessed the demise of his nephew Alfonso, son and heir of his brother Infante Manuel. Alfonso Manuel was born sometime during the decade between 1256, the date of his parents’ marriage, and 1266, date of the death of his mother Constanza de Aragón. He would have been, then, about fifteen or sixteen years of age at the time of his death, a fact corroborated by Jofré de Loaysa, a member of Queen ­Violante’s retinue and intimate adviser of the royal family, who refers to Alfonso Manuel in his chronicle as “nobilis vir dompnus Alfonsus.”85 Though royal chancery documents are absent between 5 August and 10 ­December 1275, evidence from Cantiga 235 suggests that Alfonso and Manuel were in Montpellier from August to November while the king recovered from a nearly fatal illness.86 Sometime during these three months, Infante Manuel married Beatrice Contesson. What had motivated this apparently hasty and unforeseen a­ lliance? On the one hand, we may easily agree with both Ballesteros and ­Lomax, who believe that this time the link forged between the kingdom of C ­ astile and the House of Savoy was to be for dynastic, not political, reasons, though they do not provide any details.87 Let us review the evidence. Infante Manuel had had only two children with Constanza de Aragón, Alfonso and Violante, and now, at age forty-one, he faced the future

188

Dawn of a Dynasty

without a male heir. At the same time, Beatrice Contesson was about twenty-three and had several years earlier lost her ­husband, Pierre de Chalon, in a marriage that had lasted six years without ­children. Contesson’s mother, Cecile des Baux, had passed away in May of that year, and the young countess was now a widow and an orphan. It would seem that the political advantages of a union with the brother of the king of Castile and contender for the throne of the Holy Roman Empire had largely faded when Pope Gregory announced Alfonso’s ­ ­ abdication and Rudolf of Habsburg’s imminent coronation on 6 ­October 1275.88 Contesson’s uncle, Count Philippe of Savoy, sensing that the young widow’s presence in Savoy could become the source of serious problems should she marry someone who might reinstate her claims to the House of Savoy, as Pierre de Chalon had apparently attempted to do in 1271, was not reluctant to resort to the same strategy he had previously employed with his niece Beatrice, daughter of Peter II of Savoy, when he removed her from the region with a marriage to Gaston de Béarn in 1273.89 In fact, a document dated Isère, 9 July 1275, in which Bertrand, lord of Moirans, confirms his last will and testament naming Beatrice Contesson his universal heir, indicates that she still possessed feudal retainers with certain ­obligations towards her and sufficient income and financial authority to possibly pose just the kind of problem that Count Philippe so much wanted to avoid.90 Ayala Martínez believes that the marriage was contracted for political reasons, motivated by Alfonso’s desire to take advantage of any possible alliance that would further his ambitions for the crown of the Holy Roman Empire, yet the logic of this argument had largely faded with Gregory’s pronouncement in favour of Rudolf of Habsburg.91 The marriage, under these circumstances, was advantageous not to Alfonso but to his brother Manuel for the dynastic reasons set forth above. Of  the various motives adduced thus far, however, none appears to have been sufficient to prompt the marriage with the notable exception of Manuel’s desire to engender a new heir. Unnoticed by all of the historians who have dealt with the matter until now is a document despatched by Count Philippe of Savoy to Edward I of England on 11 November 1275. This missive at once provides us with an indisputable motive and a sequence of connections between the royal houses of Castile and England and the House of Savoy that supply the answers we are seeking. Count Philippe, uncle of Eleanor, queen of England, had been a frequent visitor to the court of Henry III since 1241, when the king endowed him with numerous benefices in Hillingdon, Oxney, and Geddington.92 Over the years, he had continued to enjoy the best of relations with the new monarch,



The House of Savoy: 1275

189

Edward I, Alfonso’s brother-in-law and close ally since his marriage to Alfonso’s half-sister Leonor, in 1254. Edward had also remained one of Alfonso’s staunchest supporters during the Castilian’s attempts to secure the Holy Roman Empire, writing to Pope Gregory in May 1275 to express his unconditional defence of Alfonso’s claims.93 During that same month, while Alfonso was in Beaucaire, he would write to him promising to aid the “king of the Romans and Castile” against Rudolf of Habsburg.94 After Gregory’s proclamation in favour of Rudolf in ­October 1275, however, Alfonso’s claims had been effectively annulled. Surprisingly, on 11 November 1275, Count Philippe wrote to Edward I informing him that he was now at war with Rudolf and “pluribus allis Magnatibus,” urging his assistance in the matter.95 Philippe would not yet have learned of the defeat of the Angevin troops at the B ­ attle of Roccavione one day earlier at the hands of the marquesses of Montferrat and Saluzzo, but these two were certainly on his mind, and their victory would cause him even greater alarm. It is entirely possible that the conflict at ­Roccavione was a triumph for Montferrat and Saluzzo precisely because of the intervention of the Castilian troops, which had been sent there by Alfonso X as part of the agreement made with ­William of Montferrat when the marquess married the sovereign’s daughter Beatrice four years earlier.96 It was, then, Count Philippe who would eagerly pursue the alliance with Alfonso and Castile. Alfonso’s advantage in the marriage was negligible in comparison with the prestige it would mean for the House of Savoy in its current struggle against not only Rudolf but the encroaching forces of the count’s relatives, William of Montferrat, Alfonso’s son-in-law, and Thomas of Saluzzo. No doubt Infante Manuel’s need to produce a new heir was a significant motive, but it must have been Count Philippe who initiated the marital arrangement at this point in time. Given the circumstances, we may well imagine the following ­scenario: Count Philippe, upon learning of the death of Alfonso M ­ anuel and anxious to forge an alliance with Castile to repulse the threat posed by Rudolf of Habsburg, the Angevine forces in the Piedmont, and the marquesses of Montferrat and Saluzzo, now reconsidered the possibility of a marriage with the House of Savoy. Philippe’s anxiety had reached a peak on 11 November 1275 when he wrote to Edward I of the war he feared with Rudolf and the other magnates. Alfonso and Manuel were in residence at Montpellier and Beatrice was either at Besançon, where she had lived with her late husband, Pierre de Chalon, or perhaps at La Rochette, where she may have been with her dying mother, Cecile des Baux, who expired in May 1275. A marriage by proxy or contract most likely took place sometime in the second half of November and probably in Montpellier.

190

Dawn of a Dynasty

We know the nuptial agreement stipulated that Manuel would provide a dowry of four thousand marks of silver because he states so in his last will and testament, adding that should Beatrice need more money than he has provided for her, she should receive the amount of her dowry plus the £1,700 tournois she had loaned him when they were married.97 The reason for the loan is unknown, but we may speculate that there were considerable expenses connected with the wedding that Manuel was not prepared to assume given that he was in transit through Languedoc at the time. We also know that Contesson brought with her to the marriage certain property rights in the County of Savoy in spite of the fact that she had renounced her claims to the title when she married Pierre de Chalon in 1268. In 1312 Contesson’s son, Juan Manuel, petitioned his father-in-law, Jaime II de Aragón, to request from Barral II des Baux certain documents attesting to holdings he had inherited from his mother in the Comtat Venaissin.98 Barral II (1301–31) was the son of Bertrand II des Baux, count of Avellino (1244–1305) and the nephew of Contesson’s mother, Cecile des Baux.99 The late count, Juan Manuel’s great uncle, had earlier played an important role in arranging his nephew’s betrothal to Jaime’s daughter, Constanza, in 1305–1306.100 These particular holdings are also clearly asserted, though not identified, in both of Juan Manuel’s two testaments in which he leaves to his son Fernando “todo el derecho que yo he de parte de mj madre en los condados de Saboya et de Benexi.”101 Assets in the County of Savoy would have been those left to Beatrice by her father Amadeus IV and those in Benexí (Castilian for Venaissin) by her mother.102 In fact, Beatrice would come to Castile with a title that was at once problematic and largely unknown in a kingdom where the rank of count was highly unusual during the thirteenth century.103 Contesson’s son Juan Manuel attempts to explain the significance of the title in the Libro de los estados: “And this is a very strange rank which encompasses many different types of men since in many lands it so happens that princes, sons of kings, are counts and there are other counts who are wealthier and more powerful than some dukes, and even more so than some kings; and there are other counts who scarcely have more than fifty knights.”104 Unfortunately for Contesson, the first year of her marriage to I­ nfante Manuel would coincide with one of the most turbulent periods in the reign of her new brother-in-law, the king of Castile. The invasion of ­Andalusia by the Marinid emir of Morocco, Abu Yusuf, which had begun in May 1275, was rapidly followed by the death of Crown Prince Fernando in July, a recrudescence of Alfonso’s illness in the fall, and Sancho’s tenuous victory over the invaders towards the end of



The House of Savoy: 1275

191

December.105 Manuel and Beatrice had returned with the king to Toledo in January 1276 and now, under heavy pressure to name a successor, Alfonso would convoke cortes in Burgos from May to July, a legislative session in which Infante Manuel would play a major role. In the meantime, the question of the Navarrese succession, which had smouldered since the death of King Henry on 22 July 1274, now flaired up with renewed violence involving opposing factions in Aragón, France, and Castile to such an extent that it seemed the reign of Alfonso X was slowly moving inexorably towards the brink of civil war.106

7 Problems of Succession: 1276–82

The demise of the heir apparent, Fernando de la Cerda, had created yet another dilemma for the beleaguered monarch. On his deathbed, ­Fernando had reportedly sworn his faithful vassal Juan Núñez de Lara – son of the late adelantado mayor, Nuño González, who had fallen in the Battle of Écija on 7 September 1275 – to protect and promote the cause of his firstborn son, Alfonso, as successor to the throne, thus placing the powerful House of Lara squarely behind the de la Cerdas.1 At the same time, the CAX reveals that Lope Díaz de Haro had made a pact with Infante Sancho, to support his rival claim as the rightful heir apparent.2 The situation was further complicated by the fact that Alfonso de la Cerda’s mother, Blanche, was the sister of the king of France, Philippe III, who had every reason to believe that his young nephew would be proclaimed heir to the throne of Castile and León. Any challenge to the de la Cerda claim would be vigorously contested by the French monarch. Furthermore, King Alfonso was in a legal quandary: he had previously ruled in the Espéculo (2.16.1,3), promulgated in 1255, and the Siete Partidas (II.15.2), published before 1265, that legal succession to the throne descended in a direct line from father to firstborn son to grandson.3 On the one hand, he was bound de jure by his own ­legal pronouncements; on the other hand, he was faced with his own de facto illness, the strong probability of renewed Muslim invasions on the frontier, and the unyielding reality that Alfonso de la Cerda, a five-year-old child at the time of his father’s death, would be unable to rule as a monarch in his own right until his majority, while Sancho was already a battle-tested warrior who commanded the allegiance of many of the most powerful lords of the realm. Ultimately, the matter would have to be resolved in consultation with the cortes, but for the moment the m ­ onarch would first have to ascertain the dimensions of the problem, which would then allow him to more accurately assess the



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

193

consequences of any actions he might take in this regard. To this end, Alfonso X would summon Infante Sancho and his supporters, who had recently repulsed the Marinid invasion in Andalusia, to meet with him in Toledo. Having departed Alcalá de Henares at the beginning of January, the king, accompanied by Infante Manuel and his new bride, arrived with the royal entourage in the province of Toledo a week later, alternating his residence until 4 February between the Imperial City and ­Camarena, thirty kilometres to the north.4 Here the CAX records that “Infante Don Sancho and all the nobles and knights and local council members who were on the frontier came at this time to Toledo to see the king.”5 All those who had recently fought together with the young infante, ­especially Lope Díaz de Haro, now urged the king to name him his successor, a petition to which Alfonso gave the following response: While he believed that Sancho was qualified to be king, he would take counsel concerning the matter and give his answer in due time. And he called together his advisors and Infante Don Manuel and spoke to them of the conversation he had had with Lope Díaz and asked them for their guidance in the affair and all those who were present were very hesitant to offer advice. And Don Manuel said to him: “Sire, the royal line of d ­ escent cannot be annuled by any agreement nor can a rightful heir be disinherited thereby. And if the first-born son should die, the next son in line should be named heir. And there are three things which are not subject to settlement: neither law, nor king, nor kingdom. And any agreement made counter to these is invalid, untenable, and unenforceable, and thus, since Don ­Fernando is dead, he who among all the brothers is closest to the eldest son should inherit the kingdom after the days of the king and no other.” And the text which we have from that time does not relate that any words other than these were spoken during the council.6

According to the CAX, Infante Manuel was the only one to speak out on the matter, and the eloquence of his argument carried the day when the king forthwith declared that since Infante Fernando had not yet inherited the kingdom, he could not bequeath to his children a title that he did not possess, and thus, following Infante Manuel’s reasoning, Infante Sancho was next in line of descent.7 Unmentioned by either Ballesteros or González Jiménez in their respective works on Alfonxo X, the Cuarta crónica general, written around 1460 but based on many of the same documents utilized by Fernán Sánchez de Valladolid, author of the CAX, provides additional details of the succession debates in Toledo during January-February 1276.8

194

Dawn of a Dynasty

It reports that Sancho was so convinced of his own right to the throne that he “demanded his case be heard by the cortes of Castile and León and judges were chosen to adjudicate the matter and advocates were chosen to plead both sides of the issue. And the judges selected were Infante Don Manuel and Diego López de Salcedo. And the advocates were Juan Gato de Zamora and Agustín Pérez.”9 While the author of the CAX conveys the impression that Infante Manuel’s judgment was given without benefit of debate and before any deliberations had taken place, the supplementary details provided by the Cuarta Crónica reveal that the king had invoked a more formal legal procedure involving judges and advocates who would plead the case for both sides of the issue of succession. Chosen to be a judge in the case, Diego López de Salcedo was the illegitimate son of Lope Díaz II de Haro, “Cabeza Brava,” half-brother of Doña Mencía, queen of Portugal, and Alfonso’s adelantado in Alava and Guipúzcoa.10 In this capacity he had incurred the enmity of his nephew, Lope Díaz III de Haro, Infante Sancho’s current and most ­vocal ­champion, whom he had prevented from devastating the land in Vizcaya when the rebellious nobles deserted Alfonso X for the emir of Granada in December 1272.11 Diego López was one of the monarch’s closest confidants and had recently accompanied him on the trip to Beaucaire to confer with the pope.12 Juan Gato de Zamora was a retainer of Infante Sancho’s and is mentioned for the first time in a document given in Astorga on 28 ­November 1276 in which he is referred to as “hombre del infante.”13 On 16 May 1293, he was assigned by Sancho IV to discuss a matter concerning Bayonnne with the English king, Edward I, and is referenced in the document as “Magistrum Johannem, Judice Curie nostrae,” an alcalde or judge of the royal court.14 In 1297, he bears the title of regidor de ­Zamora,15 and a year later the Crónica de Fernando IV reports that he was summarily executed by order of Sancho’s uncle, Infante Enrique.16 Clearly, Alfonso X had chosen Juan Gato, “Sancho’s man,” to plead the infante’s case. By contrast, the second advocate, Agustín Pérez, bishop of Osma, was a cleric who had faithfully served the king for many years, receiving property for his services to the crown in the 1253 partition of Seville when he was still an archdeacon.17 By the time he was elected to the episcopal see of Burgo de Osma in 1261, he had become an indispensable minion of the royal court to the extent that when he was summoned to Toledo to be consecrated in 1262, the monarch wrote to Archbishop-elect Domingo requesting him to allow the ceremony to take place in Seville “because we have need of his service.”18 Mondéjar



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

195

even theorized that he had originally been selected by the king to represent his imperial claims at the papal court of Urban IV following the demise of Alexander IV in 1261.19 Ballesteros incorrectly claimed that on the occasion of the infante’s marriage to Blanche of France he had been named Fernando de la Cerda’s spiritual godfather together with Bishop Martín Fernández of León.20 In light of this information, we must perforce revise our interpretation of Infante Manuel’s pronouncement, which, according to the author of the CAX, was the only opinion to surface during the council meeting. This is not the first time that the CAX has presented Infante Manuel as the ultimate arbiter in debates concerning the legitimacy of the monarch’s actions. According to the chronicle, in April 1267, on the occasion of Don Dinis’s petition to his grandfather to release Portugal from its remaining feudal obligation to supply fifty men-at-arms in time of war, Manuel stood up before the assembled nobles and defended the request in the face of staunch oposition by Nuño González de Lara and the silence of the other nobles, who were ­fearful of ­Alfonso’s wrath: “And Don Manuel began to speak ... And the king granted him what he asked for.”21 Again, when the sovereign consented to the outrageous demands of the insurgents in Granada, he remarked that he had relented only after “the queen and the archbishop and Don Manuel convinced me to do so.”22 But Manuel’s most striking intervention as reported by the chronicle was his public condemnation of Alfonso X and espousal of Infante Sancho’s deposition of his father at the Assembly of Valladolid in 1282: “And all those present were in agreement that ... Infante Don Sancho ... be given dominion and justice over the land ... And this sentence was handed down by Infante Don Manuel.”23 In fact, the chronicler, Fernán Sánchez de Valladolid, was fully aware of Infante Manuel’s role in the creation of the royal lineage from S ­ ancho IV to F ­ ernando IV to Alfonso XI and seems to have taken care to cast him as an authoritative and persuasive figure during the reign of ­Alfonso X, one who vigorously exercised the power of the office of alférez as ­described by the Siete Partidas and most often served as a foil to the king’s arbitrary and capricious decrees. Still suffering from the effects of his illness and perhaps for this reason unable to take a firm and decisive stance in the matter, Alfonso X set the inheritance issue aside, returning to the north and arriving in Valladolid on 25 February 1276. Infante Manuel must have accompanied him there, since on 10 March 1276 he submited to the king a lengthy report documenting the testimony of multiple witnesses in a pesquisa or enquiry into a boundary dispute between the towns of Palazuelos and Pampliega lodged two years earlier. Alfonso X had

196

Dawn of a Dynasty

answered the original complaint on 1 July 1274 indicating he would look into the matter, and must have subsequently appointed Infante Manuel to investigate.24 In the meantime, the confusion surrounding the line of succession in Castile was compounded by a series of events related to the papacy in Europe. With the death of Pope Gregory X in December 1275, the Apostolic See would witness the election and demise of yet two more popes during the year 1276: Innocent V (21 January–22 June) and Adrian V (11 July–18 August). On 8 September the College of Cardinals elevated the Portuguese Pedro Julião Rebolo, known as Petrus Hispanus, to the papacy as John XXI, a pontiff who would be noticeably favourable to Alfonso el Sabio.25 By 30 April, Alfonso was back in Burgos, where he summoned the cortes between May and the end of July 1276. Unable to further postpone a decision on the succession to the throne, he duly appointed ­Sancho as his heir, securing the approval of the representative assembly sometime towards the beginning of July.26 We know that Infante Manuel was in Burgos during the cortes because on 14 July he confirms a royal charter there ceding the castles of Chincoya and Neblí to Juan Bretón, one of his most trusted vassals.27 The castle of Chincoya figures prominently in Cantiga 185, where the Virgin rescues the Castilian defenders from a siege by Ibn al-Ahmar, emir of Granada, sometime before 1273.28 Shortly after the cortes ended, Infante Manuel set out for the kingdom of Murcia and the Tierra de Don Manuel, where a massive Mudéjar uprising in Valencia a month earlier had precipitated a hasty military intervention on the part of his father-in-law Jaime I, who had been ill for some time. Rightly concerned with the revolt in Valencia, Infante Manuel was also anxious to assess any damages incurred in his own domain during the recent Marinid invasion and to renew efforts to consolidate his holdings while encouraging further Christian settlements in the region. Scarcely a week after departing from Burgos, Infante Manuel a­ rrived in Murcia, where he issued a charter confirming the partition of Elche.29 Several days later, he was apprised of the death of Jaime I, who had expired on 27 July, leaving the kingdom to his son and the infante’s ­brother-in-law, Pedro III (Fig. 27). If we are to believe Zurita, it a­ ppears that Alfonso X, taking advantage of the Mudéjar uprising, had instructed his brother to revive their former strategy of destabilizing the region by encouraging the Muslim inhabitants to rebel against their Catalan overlords while provoking incursions by the Christian colonizers across the border in the kingdom of Valencia, a constant source of irritation that obliged Pedro III to remain in that area for most of the year.30



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

197

In the interim, the civil war in Navarre, which had smouldered since the death of King Henry on 22 July 1274, now flared up again with r­ enewed intensity during May and June 1276. The question of the Navarrese succession had been complicated by the flight to France of Queen Mother Blanche of Artois and her daughter and heiress, Jeanne I, in August 1274, when the queen regent had sought and received the protection of her cousin, Philippe III the Bold. The French king had now become the de facto ruler of Navarre with the additional political advantage conferred by the Treaty of Orleans, signed in May 1275, when the marriage of Jeanne I and his second son, the seven-year-old Philippe (later Philippe IV the Fair; r. 1285–1314), was arranged. Further compounding the political instability of the region, Jaime’s death in July had led to a collapse of the Aragonese faction in Navarre, whose members in Pamplona now quickly realigned with Castile against French rule. Philippe III, incensed over Alfonso’s failure to ratify the rights of his nephews to the throne of Castile during the cortes held from May through July, and rightly sensing a defeat in Navarre if he did not act with firm resolve, determined to raise an army and invade the ­Peninsula.31 At the same time, he despatched a detachment of troops under the command of Blanche’s brother, Robert II, count of Artois, to defend French claims in Pamplona, where they arrived in August.32 Alfonso X had initially reacted to protect Castilian interests in Navarre by sending his own forces there under the command of Simón Ruiz de los Cameros.33 The expected battle never materialized. Inexplicably, the Castilian army marched to Monreal, a few kilometers to the southeast of Pamplona, and remained there without making any effort to relieve the beleaguered Castilian partisans who were massacred by the French a few days later. In fact, in the Crónica de los reyes de Navarra, Carlos, prince of Viana, remarks that Simón Ruiz was later executed by Alfonso X for his failure to come to the aid of the Castilian sympathizers during the siege of Pamplona.34 Unbeknownst to Alfonso X, and apparently to Ballesteros and González Jiménez, on 2 April 1276 in Tudela, Simón Ruiz de los ­Cameros, Lope Díaz de Haro, and numerous Castilian nobles had signed a mutual defence treaty with the French governor of Navarre, Eustache de Beaumarchais, seneschal of Toulouse, recalling an earlier pact endorsed by Infante Felipe with Henry of Navarre on 22 January 1273. The text of the accord amply reveals the extent to which the most recent rebellion of Alfonso’s vassals had progressed: D. Lope Díaz, Lord of Vizcaya, and D. Simón Ruiz, Lord of los Cameros, with Diego López de Haro, D. Pedro Díaz and D. Muño Díaz de Castañeda,

198

Dawn of a Dynasty

and D. Pedro Manrique and D. Vela Ladrón de Guevara, D. Lope Descaño, and D. Gonzalvo Gómez de Manzanedo, and D. Gómez Gil de Villalobos, D. Pedro Gómez Descaño, and D. Rodrigo Rodríguez, together with all the other nobles and knights of their alliance ... will not make or pact any peace agreement whatsoever with the king of Castile, nor with any other person on the part of the king of Castile, without the advice and consent of D. Simón and D. Lope and of the other aforementioned nobles of their alliance ... And these aforesaid conditions and conventions must be kept and maintained by both parties, as mentioned above, until the next feast of Saint Mary Magdalene [22 July].35

Nowhere in the document is there any mention of Infante Fadrique, and we may suppose that he was far too clever to put his name on any agreement with the rebels, though he was clearly the malefic genius behind the insurrection. While the “sanchistas” who backed ­Infante ­Sancho’s rights to the throne were busy plotting in Navarre, Juan Núñez de Lara and his brother, Núñez González, sons of Nuño González de Lara who had died in the defence of Écija a year earlier, and both cousins of the king, were in Angoulême with other Castilian nobles, where they withdrew their allegiance from Alfonso X, pledging homage to Philippe III in September 1276.36 Alfonso’s refusal to certify the rights of his grandson Alfonso de la Cerda during the cortes held in May through July had alienated Juan Núñez, a staunch supporter of the deceased Fernando, to whom he had made a deathbed promise to uphold the de la Cerda interests. A year earlier in the fall of 1275, according to Cantiga 235, Alfonso X had returned to Castile to the general applause of his subjects: “When he entered Castile, they came to meet him / all the people of the land, and told him thus: / ‘A very good day to you, Sire,’”37 a claim substantiated by the contemporary account of the Catalan chronicler ­Ramon ­Muntaner.38 Cantiga 235 then narrates that soon after, treacherous factions arose to betray him most disgracefully: “However, later, believe you me, / King Don Sancho in Portugal was never betrayed so vilely.”39 In the following stanza, however, the poet assures us that “the greater part of the nobles conspired, as I / know, to expel him from the k ­ ingdom so that it would belong to them / and they could divide it among themselves. However, they failed in their attempt / for God raised him to the summit and drove them down into the depths.”40 The poet, in all likelihood Alfonso himself, writes with hindsight, and he will be avenged. By 5 September, the king had taken up residence in Vitoria, where Cantiga 235 recalls that “[a]nother time, when he dwelt in Vitoria for



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

199

a year and a month, / while he lay gravely ill, the king of France / attacked him with a very large army. However, he later behaved more courteously, / for God dissolved his plan as water dissolves salt.”41 Philippe III was about to move upon Alfonso with an army that might easily have overwhelmed the Castilian. But the French forces never ­progressed beyond Sauveterre-de-Béarn, fifty kilometres east of ­Bayonne, where an unusually rainy fall and lack of supplies obliged them to abandon their campaign in November.42 Truly, Alfonso could gloat in the conviction that he had been spared by the hand of God. At this point, Philippe III thought it wise to sue for peace and sent his emissaries to Vitoria, where the two sides reached an understanding of sorts on 4 November 1276. The two treaties of Vitoria contained a number of features favourable to Alfonso X: a truce was declared between Castile and Navarre until Jeanne’s majority; Infante Sancho was required to foreswear all allegiance and promise of support that had been pledged to him by the rebellious nobles against the claims of the de la Cerda ­children; Alfonso X agreed to convoke the cortes within a year and place before the three estates the question of succession, promising to abide by their decision; at the same time, the king would pardon Juan Núñez de Lara and those of his alliance who had lately sworn fealty to Philippe III. Perhaps in view of the fact that the details of the treaty were so advantageous to Alfonso, Philippe never ratified the agreement.43 While all these momentous events were transpiring in the north, Infante Manuel was earnestly engaged in the business of assuring the well-being of his Christian settlers in Murcia and attempting to attract new colonists to lands regularly depleted by the adverse circumstances of abandonment, rebellion, and war. On 11 August 1276, he addressed the town council of Elche in the matter of vezindat, or the time required for settlers to live on and develop their land before they had a vested right in the property with the authority to sell, exchange, or assign it to another.44 That same day, the industrious infante granted to the town council of Elche 1,500 tahúllas of land with corresponding water rights and 7,500 tahúllas to be set aside for the most recent settlers.45 Three months later, on 8 November, Infante Manuel continued with his improvements in Elche by allocating additional water rights to the settlers and town council.46 Water rights were not the only concern of the Christian settlers in Murcia. They were also eager to have the laws and privileges previously granted to other towns. In this context, we have a charter issued by Infante Manuel in Almansa on 13 November 1276 confirming to the town council the laws and franchises earlier granted by Alfonso X.47 The tradition of confering fueros on a town or municipality was a complex and fluid convention that was frequently

200

Dawn of a Dynasty

subject to amendments according to the current needs of the settlers.48 Alfonso originally gave Almansa the fuero of Requena on 15 April 1262 and the fuero of Cuenca on 9 October 1264 (which was reaffirmed on 15 February 1265), and on 27 October 1265 ordered the town council of Alicante to send the town council of Almansa a copy of its fueros y privilegios of Seville.49 Further evidence of the intricate and constantly evolving issue of the fueros may be found on the same day Infante Manuel confirmed the laws of Almansa, when he also granted the town of Villena the fuero y franquezas of Lorca. The original 13 November 1276 document by ­Infante Manuel is found within another given by Sancho IV on 22 May 1293 confirming his uncle’s decree, subsequently reconfirmed by Juan Manuel on 6 February 1307.50 Both of the charters from 1276 are significant in that they demonstrate for the first time that Almansa and Villena, which had been given to Alfonso X in the Treaty of Almizra in 1244, had now been ceded to Infante Manuel, who probably received them from his brother following his marriage to Beatrice of Savoy in 1275. By 1277, Villena had begun to eclipse Elche as the most important municipality in the Tierra de Don Manuel.51 We have no documentary evidence indicating Infante Manuel’s whereabouts from 13 November in Almansa until the cortes of Burgos in May 1277, but the presence of Infante Sancho in Almansa on 17 April 1277 strongly suggests that he visited his uncle there, where he also issued an injunction to the judges and magistrates of Córdoba requiring Jews who rented houses from Christians outside the Jewish quarter to pay the diezmo or tithe.52 We may further speculate that Sancho’s meeting with Infante Manuel must have been closely related to certain decisions that were then being taken to address the problem of Infante Fadrique and his son-in-law Simón Ruiz de los Cameros. Sancho’s vist, then, would seem to indicate that Infante Manuel continued to reside in the kingdom of Murcia until May 1277. The new year found Alfonso X still in Vitoria with scant respite from the problems that had confronted him the year before. At some time during the winter of 1276–77, he would suffer an excruciating recurrence of his illness, which yet another cantiga, number 209, recounts in detail, informing us that he was once again near death.53 In the meantime, the king of France, frustrated in his bid to dominate Castilian and Navarrese politics by brute force, was actively supporting those clandestine factions in Castile hostile to Alfonso in an attempt to coerce a resolution favourable to his nephews, the de la Cerda children. For his part, Infante Sancho and his allies were hard at work to consolidate his own claims to the throne.



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

201

Several months earlier, as we have seen, in the November peace talks with the emissaries of Philippe III in Vitoria, Alfonso had agreed to summon the cortes within a year and place before the three estates the matter of succession, promising to abide by their decision. The sovereign had returned to Burgos during the first week of March 1277 and immediately convoked the cortes, which convened there sometime during April. Given the dismal state of the economy and the need to address a number of fiscal exigencies, the business transacted by the cortes revolved almost entirely around matters of taxation and revenue enhancement, effectively postponing the question of succession until a later date. One of the prime concerns Alfonso X faced at this juncture was a lack of currency in circulation, especially the dineros prietos that he had minted in 1270–71 and that, while representing a debased billon coin, had been set at an artificially high rate of exchange with the gold maravedí of account, thus ensuring it would be hoarded, with the resultant scarcity of goods for sale throughout the kingdom.54 Furthermore, the monarch had promised during the assembly at Jerez in 1268 not to debase the coinage again, and now the most notable participants convened in the cortes of Burgos addressed an urgent letter to Pope John XXI on 9 May 1277 entreating him to release the king from his vow. The missive begins with Infante Manuel’s authoritative voice intoning the salutation to the pontiff ahead of all the most eminent nobles and prelates in the land, leaving the reader with no doubt that he was undisputably one of the most consequential architects of the activities taking place during this convocation: “To the very Holy Father and Lord Don Juan, by the grace of God, Pope of the Holy Roman Church. We, Infante Don Manuel, brother of the king of Castile and Infante Don Juan, son of that same king....”55 The missive to Pope John goes on to cite as one of the principal reasons for seeking absolution the recent invasion of the Marinids who had “arrived from across the sea, and ... are raiding the land, and ... capturing many people” (59), rekindling the crisis in Andalusia of two years earlier. This time, the main invasion forces under Abu Yusuf would subsequently disembark in Tarifa on 1 July to pursue a new and more vigorous jihad. Cantiga 235 informs us that “[a]fter leaving C ­ astile, the king was eager / to go to the frontier; but the virtuous Lady / did not wish him to go there just then, until he recovered more fully; / therefore She gave him a general fever throughout his body.”56 Though the gravity of the situation would certainly seem to mandate the presence of the king on the frontier, he would be unable to make the journey south for fully another year. The cantiga states that he was physically incapable of meeting the invading Moroccan army because of a “febre geeral,” a chronic, debilitating fever.

202

Dawn of a Dynasty

The cortes of Burgos probably ended sometime before Pentecost on 16 May, and shortly thereafter the king lost a close ally, the Portuguese Pope John XXI, who died on 20 May.57 A few days earlier Lope Díaz de Haro was in Pamplona, where he had abandoned his allegiance to Alfonso X, having signed a receipt on 16 May for monies advanced for feudal service to the king of France.58 Then, towards the end of June, quite suddenly and apparently without warning, Infante Fadrique and his son-in-law Simón Ruiz de los Cameros were executed on Alfonso’s orders. It is possible that neither of the victims had attended the cortes, and while both confirm a diploma dated 21 June, a royal document of 7 July assigns extensive holdings belonging to Fadrique in Seville to the cathedral of that city, indicating his property had been forfeited to the crown.59 The CAX, though mistakenly assigning the incident to the year 1276, gives a fuller picture of these events and some suggestion of the rapidity with which they took place: And because the king had learned of certain things concerning Infante Fadrique, his brother, and Simón Ruiz de los Cameros, the king ordered Infante Sancho to seize Simón Ruiz de los Cameros, and then to have him killed. And Infante Sancho then left Burgos and went to Logroño and found Simón Ruiz there, and seized him; and this same day in which he was apprehended, Diego López de Salcedo detained Infante Fadrique in Burgos by order of the king. And Infante Sancho went to Treviño, and ordered Simón Ruiz to be burned there at the stake; and the king ordered Infante Fadrique to be strangled.60

We have no conclusive data concerning the circumstances surrounding these executions. The remarks by the author of the CAX are ­puzzling and obscure. Alfonso found out certain things about Fadrique and Simón, matters so threatening that they compelled him to act with the greatest despatch and secrecy. Both González Jiménez and Salvador Martínez provide extensive appraisals of the evidence available to date on the matter, with Martínez offering the most balanced perspective.61 Nevertheless, neither of these two scholars appears to be aware of ­Yanguas y Miranda’s publication of contemporary documents from the ­Archives of Navarre revealing a widespread conspiracy perpetrated on 2 April 1276 by Simón de los Cameros and Lope Díaz de Haro with the connivance of the French governor, Eustache de Beaumarchais, fully a year before Lope fled to France.62 González Jiménez rejects ­Ballestero’s contention that Lope was a co-conspirator because it would make no sense for such a staunch supporter of Infante ­Sancho to defect to the French camp and Philippe III, the most outspoken defender of the



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

203

de la Cerda children.63 But the facts are clear: Lope Díaz, an avowed “sanchista,” had already abandoned the infante’s cause in April 1276, though his dissertion was not discovered until a year later. Five months afterwards, in September 1276, Juan Núñez de Lara and his brother Núñez González, the most ardent Castilian advocates of the de la Cerda children, were in Angoulême with other Castilian nobles, including the king’s cousin Fernán Pérez Ponce, where they withdrew their ­allegiance from Alfonso X, pledging homage to Philippe III, who was well aware that he was now pacting with dissidents on both sides of the succession debate.64 Clearly, then, the rebels’ concern with the question of succession was not as pressing as the perceived need to remove Alfonso X from power, the same urgency that had previously united the disparate mutinous factions during the uprising of the nobility in 1273. At the same time, the surreptitious withdrawal of Lope Díaz de Haro from Sancho’s camp would certainly explain the infante’s willingness to carry out the execution of Simón Ruiz de los Cameros, Lope’s co-conspirator. Infante Fadrique, however, had been more circumspect in covering his tracks, and perhaps Sancho’s later condemnation of Fadrique’s execution reflects the young prince’s refusal to believe that his uncle could have been complicit, absent hard evidence linking him to the plot.65 These and other similar issues were no doubt discussed at length by Infante Sancho and his uncle Manuel during their meeting in Almansa during April 1276, and subsequent events would seem to support the assumption that the two of them were already in agreement concerning Sancho’s claims to the throne. Meanwhile, Infante Manuel’s position in the hierarchy at court had changed. A document dated 7 July 1277 in which Infante Sancho now confirms as the king’s mayordomo, an office Infante Fernando had held from 1260 until his death in July 1275, provides a significant assessment of the situation. Infante Manuel confirms without any title whatsoever, and the office of the king’s alférez he previously held is now occupied by the king’s younger son, Infante Juan, prompting several questions: Why had the office of alférez been conferred upon a thirteen-year-old boy, born in 1264, or was he actually born in 1263 and had just come of age? Why had Infante Pedro, his sixteen-year-old brother, been passed over for the post? And finally, had the recent unpleasantness with ­Fadrique and Simón Ruiz somehow convinced the monarch that none of his brothers could be trusted? Enrique, Felipe, and Fadrique had b ­ etrayed him and perhaps Infante Manuel was destined to do the same.66 Infante Manuel remained in Burgos following the cortes where, on 1 August, he confirmed, together with his godfather Archbishop ­Remondo of Seville and other ecclesiastical dignitaries, a document

204

Dawn of a Dynasty

authenticating copies of letters concerning the rebellion in Gascony exchanged between Henry III and Alfonso X in 1256 that had been requested by Henry’s son and successor, Edward I, Infante Manuel’s brother-in-law.67 By 3 August Abu Yusuf had arrived at the gates of Seville, where he met and defeated the Castilian forces commanded by King Alfonso’s illegitimate son Alfonso Fernández el Niño. In rapid succession, the Moroccans attacked Jerez on 15 September and Córdoba on 30 October.68 The worsening situation was aggravated by the absence of many of the most powerful nobles in Castile and León together with their feudal retainers. The election of Pope Nicholas III on 25 November would signal yet another source of irritation for the beleaguered monarch, who, sick with fever, attacked by the French in the north and the Marinids in the south, would now be importuned by a pope bent on a rapid reconciliation of the princes of Christendom.69 In fact, Alfonso was so gravely ill that on 8 November 1277 he caused Infante Sancho to pledge under oath that he would complete the recently undertaken construction of the convent of the nuns of Caleruega should something untoward befall the king.70 Under these trying circumstances, Infante Manuel remained steadfastly by the monarch’s side in Burgos, where several days later he endorsed a royal privilege requested by Bishop Agustín of Osma, a document that indicates he had been fully restored to his brother’s confidence and was now his mayordomo mayor, the office most recently held by Infante Sancho, who is referred to here as “fijo maior e heredero,” while in the same charter Infante Juan retains the title of alférez.71 At this juncture, when it seemed as if the beleaguered king could endure no further travails, Queen Violante, on the pretext of visiting her feudal holdings in Guadalajara and in collusion with her brother Pedro III, absconded to Aragón with her grandchildren, the infantes Alfonso and Fernando de la Cerda, and their mother, Blanche. Until now, the date of the event has been surrounded by controversy: while the Flórez edition of the contemporary Anales toledanos states that the episode took place in January 1278, “in mense Ianuarii,”72 the month is not stated in Floriano’s more recent paleographic edition,73 leading us to conclude that the month was later added by the editors of the España sagrada collection. On the other hand, the CAX claims that following the cortes held in Segovia from May through June 1278, when Infante Sancho was proclaimed heir to the throne, the queen “left S ­ egovia with Doña Blanca taking with her Don Alfonso and Don Fernando. And they crossed the mountain pass arriving at Uceda and from there to G ­ uadalajara and Hita and Atienza and Medinaceli. Thence they proceded to Ariza in the kingdom of Aragón where King Pedro met them and took them



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

205

to Calatayud.”74 In fact, the Itinerario of Pedro III, established by Ferran Soldevila with reference to chancery documents from the Crown of Aragón, places the king in “Fariça” on 8 January and in “Calataiub” on 13 January 1278, coinciding precisely with the claims of the CAX, though the chronicle patently errs in stating that the queen departed from Segovia after the cortes, not before.75 Unaware of S ­oldevila’s ­archival work on Pere el Gran, Ballesteros rejected the evidence of the Anales toledanos because it contradicted the narrative of the CAX. This choice, however, positioned him squarely at odds with a letter that he cites from Pedro III to Infante Sancho despatched on “xv ­kalends aprilis, anno domini m.cc.lxxviii” (18 March 1278), informing his nephew that, at her request, he had met in Borja with Queen Violante, who ­apprised him of certain information she had received from her son but upon which the Aragonese was unable to act because of other more pressing commitments.76 Ballesteros admits to being greatly confused – “La confusión y la obscuridad no pueden ser mayores” – because the missive clearly indicates that Violante was in Aragón before the cortes of Segovia, not after. However, the distinguished historian failed to take into account that the royal chancery of the Crown of Aragón recorded the beginning of the new year not on Calends, or 1 January, but on 8 Calends April, or 25 March, the Feast of the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary.77 Thus, in Aragonese court documents, January-­FebruaryMarch 1278 were actually January-February-March 1279, as may be seen in Martínez Ferrando’s catalogue of documents from the reign of Pedro III, where he consistently lists the days of the first three months of the new year with double dates: for example, January 1–31, 1278–79, February 1–28, 1278–79, and March 1–24, 1278–79, but with March 27 recorded as 1279.78 Further proof of the error, if any were needed, is provided by Pedro III’s Itinerario, which places him on 17 March 1278 in Denia (Valencia) and in Borja a year later on 16–18 March 1279. There can be no doubt that Violante was present in Ariza with Pedro III, her grandchildren, and daughter-in-law Blanche on 8 January 1278 and in Borja with her brother Pedro III in March 1279. What, then, are we to make of the assertion in 1562 by the official chronicler of the Crown of Aragón, Jerónimo Zurita, that Queen Violante fled Castile precisely on 8 January 1277?79 There can be no other explanation than to suppose Zurita must have had access to the royal chancery registers placing Pedro III in Ariza on 8 January 1277, which in accordance with the chronometric tradition of the Aragonese chancery would have been the equivalent of 8 January 1278 in Castile. Paradoxically, Ballesteros vaguely and inaccurately refers to a supposed nativity or encarnation tradition in Aragón instead of one based on Christ’s conception when

206

Dawn of a Dynasty

trying to reconcile the Anales toledanos 1278 date for Violante’s flight to Aragón with the 1279 date he had calculated from his reliance on the CAX: “The date given by the Anales toledanos approaches the truth because at the end of this year Doña Violante was preparing for her trip but we do not believe she was on Aragonese soil until January 1279. It might well be that the news came from Aragón and there the Christian calculation of the Encarnation prolonged the year 1278 until March of 1279 since the birth of Christ. Therefore, January 1278 was 1279 of the Nativity.”80 This confusion explains why Ballesteros did not pursue the same solution with regard to Zurita’s assertion of 8 January 1277, suggesting instead that the Aragonese chronicler was “engañado por la CAX” (862), an ironic observation, since it was Ballesteros himself who was led astray by the very same document. More importantly, perhaps, Ballesteros is not alone in his miscalculation of the dates of documents despatched by the Aragonese chancery. The first two volumes of the Memorial histórico español, published by the Royal Spanish Academy in 1851 and containing transcriptions of numerous thirteenth-century documents upon which Ballesteros and many other scholars have relied, also misunderstood the royal chancery’s chronometric tradition, but not consistently.81 Within this same context, a communication from Pedro III to Alfonso X dated “Barchinona iii nonas januarii anno domini m.cc.lxxviii” or 3 January 1278, in which the Aragonese refers to a ­Castilian embassy to Barcelona headed by Infante Manuel, must be dated 3 January 1279.82 By 11 March 1278 Alfonso was still in Burgos. At this juncture Cantiga 235 recounts that the king’s illness intensified to such an extent that he went straightway to Valladolid, where the Virgin brought him near the point of death: “When they thought he would die, he went this time / directly to Valladolid ... However, before She made him well, / She caused his condition to reach such severity that no judge / would have pronounced him alive and the Holy Empress / caused him to experience death.”83 In fact, Alfonso left Burgos for Valladolid, passing on the way through Peñafiel on 24 March84 and arriving in Valladolid five days before Holy Sunday, 10 April 1278.85 In the image of Christ, he would spend Holy Week in the agony of death, his physicians having abandoned all hope for his recovery.86 Then, on Easter Day, the cantiga informs us, the Virgin suddenly and miraculously healed him: “However, on the happy day / of Easter she wished him to live.”87 Easter Day 1278 fell on 17 April, a week after the king’s arrival in Valladolid. The effects of the miraculous healing must have been substantial, since Alfonso had sufficiently recovered by the first week of June to attend the cortes in Segovia, where he turned over



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

207

many of his royal responsibilities to Sancho.88 We know Infante Manuel was at his bedside during these arduous days because he appears in a privilege granted by the king to the Cathedral of Seville on 26 April in which he confirms as “hermano del Rey e su mayordomo.”89 By the second week of June, Alfonso X was in Segovia where he would preside over the cortes to be held in that city during the next three months. The CAX informs us that the king was accompanied by “the infantes and the masters of the military orders, the members of the nobility, knights and representatives of the towns and villages of his kingdom” (68.193), and we may be sure that Infante Manuel was among those gathered there to swear fealty to the future monarch, his nephew Don Sancho. More important, perhaps, was the king’s desperate need for funds to pursue the crusade against the Muslim invaders who had recently occupied Algeciras, an economic crisis whose p ­ roportions are mirrored by the number of chancery documents issued during the cortes that deal with the finances of the beleaguered m ­ onarch. Furthermore, it must have been obvious to all of the assembled delegates that the king had not yet recovered from his illness, and even Pope N ­ icholas III, writing to the ailing sovereign in July, seemed so uncharacteristically concerned with his health as to remark – non sine a­ maritudine paterna compassionis – that if he were currently unable to arrange to despatch his ambassadors to Toulouse to meet with the representatives of Philippe III, that he might consider sending his son Sancho.90 On 19 July, Alfonso X wrote to the municipal judges and tax collectors of Burgos initiating a protracted fiscal dispute involving the monarch, Infante Sancho, and Infante Manuel’s almojarife or tax collector Don Zag: Know that Don Manuel’s man, Don Çag, appointed Don Bernalt de Çentellas to collect twenty thousand maravedís of the money coined during the war according to the agreement reached between my son, Don Sancho, and the city magistrates in the matter of the fines assessed for usury. And at this time, Apariçio Guillen, tax collector of Castile, is commanded to collect the aforesaid twenty thousand maravedís from Bernalt de Çentellas. Wherefore I order you to hand over the funds to the aforesaid Apariçio Guillen, even as Don Çag has related to you in his letter.91

Don Zag is mentioned for the first time as Manuel’s tax collector in ­Murcia on 5 April 1268, when the infante despatched a charter to the town council of Elche from Burgos: “I likewise command that all ­Christians in Elda be tried by the law and judges of Elche. I also ­order that the tax collectors and their agents by judged by my own tax collector,

208

Dawn of a Dynasty

Don Çag, or by whomever he may designate to substitute for him.”92 It is also very likely that Don Zag was not only Manuel’s tax collector but also his personal physician, as related by his wife Beatrice in a letter to the town council of Elche on 23 January 1284 confirming privileges formerly granted by her husband and exempting from taxes, among others, “don Çag and don Abrahem, our physicians whom we wish to be excused for their faithful service to our lord Don Manuel.”93 The two would later serve Sancho IV and Juan Manuel in the same capacity, as the latter relates in both the Libro de las armas and the L ­ ibro enfenido.94 The explicit testimonials of Don Zag’s good services beyond his duties as físico indicate that, as a faithful confidant of the royal family, he was assigned to other responsibilities that may well have included the collection of tax revenues, even as Pedro de Marsella, Alfonso’s personal surgeon, was entrusted with tax levies collected some months later in Castile and Extremadura to prosecute the war against the Moroccans in Algeciras.95 Don Zag’s letter to the magistrates of Burgos was despatched to the city council on 19 July, the same day as Alfonso’s letter to them referencing the role of Manuel’s almojarife.96 The intervention of the Valencian noble Bernalt de Centellas provides us with an interesting perspective on Infante Manuel’s i­ncreasingly close ties with the Crown of Aragón and Pedro III. The sixteenth-century Valencian historian Gaspar Escolano informs us that the Centellas were among the oldest and most noble of the traditional four hundred patrician families of Valencia and trusted retainers of Jaime I and his son, the heir apparent Infante Pedro.97 In 1272, Alfonso X awarded him land in Murcia for his services to the Crown of Castile.98 Two years later, in October 1274, Bernalt emerged triumphant in a duel with Arnaldo de Cabrera, who appealed the outcome to Jaime I, alleging that ­Bernalt had used a magic sword to defeat him. When the king of Aragón learned that his own son, Infante Pedro, had earlier failed in his attempt to purchase the sword from Bernalt for four hundred sueldos, he summarily revoked the sentence of the judges and declared that Arnaldo had prevailed.99 Bernalt’s close relationship with Pedro III is attested by Escolano, who relates that in June 1283 Pedro chose him and his sons Aymerique and Gilaberto to be his seconds in single combat with Charles of Anjou.100 The incident referred to in the sovereign’s letter to the town council of Burgos had arisen pursuant to Alfonso’s recently formulated fiscal policies enforcing a decree issued by Pope Gregory X during the S ­ econd Council of Lyon mandating that Christian rulers eliminate usury by fining those who had lent money at interest while demanding full restitution of any ill-gotten gains in this regard.101 Alfonso X quickly



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

209

recognized this statute as a substantial source of income with which to finance his crusade against the Morroccan invasion of Algeciras and proposed to a number of municipal councils, including Burgos, that he would not require full reimbursement of funds illegally acquired through usurious rates of interest if the cities would pay him a specific sum they would agree upon together.102 Burgos was subsequently obligated to forfeit sixty thousand maravedís, part of which was to be used to pay a company of knights Infante Sancho was currently organizing for the defence of Algeciras.103 This particular incident was one of several that would effectively foreshadow the impending power struggle between Alfonso, Sancho, and Infante Manuel, whose tax collector, Don Zag, was apparently labouring not for the benefit of the king but for Sancho, since the young prince ultimately managed to appropriate the entire amount for himself in spite of his father’s vigorous protestations in a protracted quarrel that would continue until October 1279.104 Meanwhile, Infante Manuel continued as an active participant in the cortes of Segovia, and was still there on 27 September when he endorsed a privilegio rodado to the town council of Segovia.105 By 4 October, however, the king had taken up residence in Toledo, where he would remain until the end of April 1279 and, lacking any information to the contrary, we may suppose that Manuel accompanied his brother at this time. In Toledo, Infante Manuel received a message from his brother-in-law Pedro III dated 7 October, acknowledging receipt of an earlier letter Manuel had sent him complaining of multiple instances of pillage and robbery on the part of Aragonese marauders based in Alicante who were raiding Castilian territory in the kingdom of Murcia (Fig. 28). Given the current political uncertainties in both Aragón and Castile, the Moroccan incursions in Algeciras, the tense relations both Pedro III and Alfonso X had with Philippe III of France, and the latest forays by the Castilian rebel Juan Núñez, who had recently initiated a series of attacks against the border of Cuenca from his stronghold in Albarracín, it was incumbent upon the king of Aragón to appease his Castilian relatives, and Pedro III was amply acquiescent in his exculpatory ­letter to Infante Manuel.106 Infante Manuel’s envoy to Pedro III is most probably García Sánchez de Santa Cruz, who is recorded in the Repartimiento de Murcia as a cauallero mayor, a knight of the highest rank, and a recipient of a considerable expanse of irrigated land, consonant with his exalted social status, in the Cuadrilla de Beniell to the northeast of Murcia on the road to Elche and Alicante.107 As such, he was undoubtedly well known to Infante Manuel and may likely have been among those land owners affected by the incursions of the Aragonese marauders from Alicante.

210

Dawn of a Dynasty

In the meantime, a 16 October communication despatched from Toledo by Alfonso X to the town council of Burgos indicates that the matter of the fines assessed for usury according to the terms originally stipulated by “Don Çag el de Don Manuel” in July had not yet been disbursed, and that the king was adamant in his demand that the rest of the sixty thousand maravedís be paid forthwith by don Yucef ­Abennihas, probably an official of the Burgos aljama or Jewish quarter.108 While the king was hard at work, desperately seeking to identify new sources of revenue with which to finance the defence of Algeciras, Queen Violante through her own profligacy and insouciance was squandering these same scarce resources, accumulating a substantial debt during her stay at the court of Aragón. She had been absent for nearly a year, having abandoned her husband in January 1278, and was now apparently anxious to return to Castile, as we learn from a letter sent on 24 November by her brother Pedro III to Doña Blanca, widow of Fernando de la Cerda, in which the Aragonese relates ­Violante’s desire to return “ad partes Castellae ... ad virum suum.”109 In any case, Alfonso X was equally concerned with restoring some semblance of ­familial order to his household and anxious to secure his brother-in-law’s assistance in the siege of Algeciras, not to mention the possibility of resolving the legality and long-term consequences of Pedro’s detention of the infantes de la Cerda. To more effectively address these several problems in N ­ ovember 1278, the monarch convened a diplomatic mission to meet with his brother-in-law at the Aragonese court in ­Barcelona to be headed by Infante Manuel, who would be accompanied by Ferrán Pérez, dean of Seville, the Valencian nobleman Guillén de ­Rocafull, and the king’s justice, Master Jacobo de las Leyes. All the members of the mission were well known to the infante: Ferrán Pérez, the king’s chaplain, had been a close supporter of the sovereign since his initial appointment to the cathedral chapter of Seville in 1255; Guillén de Rocafull, Pedro III’s cousin, had fought alongside Jaime I and Alfonso X in the reconquest of Murcia and was certainly one of the most knowledgeable strategists in the conflict with the Sarracens in the kingdoms of Valencia and Murcia; Master Jacobo was a recognized legal expert whose interpretation of the law would be invaluable in defining and challenging Pedro III’s custody of the infantes de la Cerda. The delegates must have been despatched sometime in D ­ ecember, since the Aragonese monarch sent Alfonso X a communiqué on 3 ­January 1279 announcing their arrival in Barcelona together with his own enigmatic comments concerning the purpose of their enterprise.110 Though Pedro III does not specifically identify the issues discussed by the members of the Castilian delegation, he applauds the fact that



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

211

Sancho, the heir apparent, has been given plenam potestatem to resolve the matter. In spite of Ballesteros’s assertion that the mission “con toda claridad ... se trata de la solicitud de un apoyo militar” (876), the secrecy, number of people involved, and implied complexities of the negotiations seem rather to point to the more ominous concerns surrounding the uncertain future of the infantes de la Cerda. Alfonso X was determined to provide them with some sort of landed inheritance that would certainly alienate Sancho and Manuel, who were adamantly opposed to any territorial resolution that might create a separate k ­ ingdom in Jaén. In fact, Infante Manuel’s presence in these deliberations would be crucial, and Pedro III requests Alfonso X to allow him to attend any future discussions of the matter. Philippe III of France was just as unyielding in his determination to have his nephews recognized as the legitimate heirs to the throne of Castile-León and was willing to resort to armed intervention if necessary. Meanwhile, Pedro III was warily eyeing the long-term implications of his strategic position in Italy vis-à-vis his wife Constance’s claims to Sicily and the impending threat of military conflict with Philippe’s uncle, Charles of Anjou. The Aragonese monarch had now become the key player in the looming crisis between France, Castile, and Aragón and was not about to relinquish custody of the infantes de la Cerda, which had effectively transformed him into the arbiter of the political destiny of these three nations. On the same day, 3 January 1279, Pedro III wrote to Infante Sancho confirming the arrival of the Castilian mission but further obfuscating the issues involved with a puzzling reference to an unjust delay of a solution to the problem that he promises to amend: To the same Infante Don Sancho. Know that we listened with pleasure and were fully apprised concerning those matters related to us on your behalf by Ferrán Pérez, dean of Seville, and learned from him of the love and affection you have for us and, conversely, we would like to communicate to you the love and affection we have for you. Concerning the matters at hand, however, as we have informed you in previous letters, it would be best to meet with you and we would be pleased to see you personally and hope that in this way the matters to be dealt with may be brought to a successful conclusion, God willing. We have also learned that you have been invested with full authority by your father and, from the aforementioned dean and eminent Infante Don Manuel and other messengers sent by you and by your father, we were, of course, apprised in this way of the ­argument concerning the opportunity to effectively delay such a praiseworthy conclusion. You, as well as we, can judge the severity of such an injustice since up to this time we have viewed you thus with esteem and we promise to correct this to your satisfaction. Given as above.111

212

Dawn of a Dynasty

The delay referred to must certainly concern the infantes de la Cerda and a resolution of their political status, a matter intricately entwined with Queen Violante’s original decision to spirit them away from C ­ astile to her brother’s protection in Aragón and now her resolve to leave the Aragonese court and return to her husband without them. Once again, Pedro III continued to manipulate the situation but, at this stage of the game, with the explicit collaboration of his nephew Infante Sancho and brother-in-law Infante Manuel, whose support in the entire controversy had become indispensable, for it was precisely these two who had most to lose in the forthcoming confrontation with the king of Castile. By the end of February 1279, Alfonso X had managed to accumulate sufficient funds, men, and materiel to initiate an attack by land on ­Algeciras headed by his son Infante Pedro and his illegitimate offspring Alfonso Fernández el Niño, lord of Molina y Mesa.112 It is significant that neither Sancho nor Manuel was involved in the Algeciras operation, though Sancho had most recently requested funds from those towns and cities obliged to pay the Crown for usurious practices with the pretext of utilizing these same resources to finance troops he would lead against the Muslim invaders. The affairs of the realm were now going so badly for Alfonso X that he had determined that the threat posed by the king of France and the rebellious Castilian nobles, who had sought refuge with him in both France and Navarre, outweighed the risks of the siege of Algeciras, and that both Sancho and Manuel were more profitably engaged in maintaining security in the north of the Peninsula. As Alfonso’s illness advanced and he became increasingly irrational, Infante Sancho was ever more inclined to seek the counsel and support he needed from his two uncles, Infante Manuel and Pedro III. In time, these three would become the nucleus around which most serious political opposition to Alfonso X would take both form and substance. The next meeting between Infante Sancho and Pedro III, alluded to in the latter’s communiqué to Alfonso X in January pursuant to the diplomatic mission headed by Infante Manuel to the Aragones court in Barcelona, took place during the first few weeks of March 1279.113 On 2 March, Pedro wrote to Alfonso X informing him that he planned to meet with Sancho as soon as he arrived in Tarazona.114 Absent any evidence to the contrary, it is plausible to assume that Infante Manuel accompanied him, since Pedro III himself had specifically requested Manuel’s presence at their next encounter to discuss the same matters that had motivated the Barcelona conference. Shortly thereafter, Pedro III wrote to his nephew that he had met with Queen Violante in Borja on 18 March, where she informed him of certain things she had learned



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

213

from Sancho but that the Aragonese was at present unable to attend to, promising to pursue the matter at a future date, and that the results would be gratifying.115 Evidence of the growing collaboration between Sancho and ­Manuel concerning a more efficient administration of matters within the ­kingdom may be seen in their joint petition in Toledo of 8 April 1279 to Alfonso X to exempt the councils of Castile, Estremadura, and Transierra from fines to be imposed for violations of weights and measures: And my son, Infante Don Sancho, and my brother, Infante Don Manuel, petitioned me to exempt you from these fines, and even though this is my right and clearly justified within my authority and something which I should not fail to demand, because Don Sancho and Don Manuel have strenuously pleaded with me and because I wish to show you goodwill and mercy, I consider it well to pardon you for these violations and that the weights and measures may be the same throughout the kingdom just as I have now commanded it.116

A royal donation given by Alfonso X in Toledo on 14 April and confirmed by “El Inffante Don Manuel hermano del Rey et su mayordomo” suggests that the petition urged by Sancho and Manuel six days earlier was an issue personally undertaken at court by both of them.117 Infante Sancho was still in Toledo on 2 May, further strengthening the contention that he and his uncle Infante Manuel were in close collaboration at this time.118 By 12 May, Alfonso X had left Toledo and was now in Villa Real on his way to Seville, from where he could more easily monitor the progress of the Castilian army engaged in the siege of Algeciras. He arrived there about 28 June 1279 and would remain in the city until the beginning of June 1280. In the meantime, we have no documentary evidence of Infante Manuel’s whereabouts between 14 April, when he was still in Toledo, and 11 November, when he confirms a royal privilege in Seville. Nevertheless, we may reasonably conjecture that Infante ­Manuel did not accompany the king to Seville at this time but travelled in the retinue of his nephew Sancho, with whom he would remain until at least the end of August. In fact, the young heir apparent was now in urgent need of men-at-arms to sustain his peace-keeping endeavours in the north and especially in the area around Cuenca, which had recently suffered incursions by Lope Díaz de Haro and Juan Núñez de Lara.119 A year earlier, Pedro III had complained angrily of attacks in the region of Valencia by Juan Núñez and his men, and now these same outlaws had intensified their activities, requiring Infante Sancho’s

214

Dawn of a Dynasty

personal intervention, which would keep him and Manuel from assisting the war effort in the south.120 Sancho was, at the same time, heavily invested in diplomatic negotiations to secure Violante’s return to ­Castile. The queen had accrued substantial debts during her sojourn in the kingdom of Aragón and would be unable to depart from there until these obligations were discharged. Infante Sancho now found himself in the parlous condition of having to finance both his military commitments and what was, in essence, ransom money for his mother. Up to this point, Infante Manuel had assisted him in the collection of the usury taxes, aided by Manuel’s own almojarife, Don Zag, and under these pressing circumstances, Sancho would surely have come to depend on his relative’s superior financial acumen to keep these funds flowing to his advantage. Scarcely two days after Sancho had announced his intention of travelling to Cuenca on 10 July, Pedro III despatched a communiqué to the bailiff of Murviedro ordering him to impose a cena or tax to support the king’s table whenever the queen of Castile was in that locale.121 What other reason could the Aragonese have had for such a directive if the queen was not, in fact, about to visit Murviedro (present-day ­Sagunt), some thirty kilometres north of Valencia, where Pedro was in residence? And if Violante was in Murviedro at that time, is it possible that she was unaware of Pedro’s plans to imprison her grandchildren in Játiva, one hundred kilometres to the south? The evidence suggests that she was indeed in Valencia to take leave of the children and her brother, travelling on from there to meet her son Sancho in Cuenca roughly two hundred kilometres to the northwest. The CAX informs us at this point that the only impediment to ­Violante’s return was her enormous debt and that Sancho had recently been ­apprised of a large sum of money collected by his father’s almojarife Don Zag de la Malea that the monarch was fully expecting to employ in the siege of Algeciras.122 Sometime during May or June, Sancho demanded that Don Zag turn over the funds to him; he subsequently used the money to purchase his mother’s safe return to Castile. In the meantime, the blockade was going badly, primarily for lack of funds to maintain both the sea and land forces required to surround the port city. Alfonso X, fully expecting to shore up his offensive with the taxes collected by Don Zag, was now faced with the fact that those funds would never arrive; in consequence, his followers were obliged to abandon the siege on 25 July, with a catastrophic loss of ships, men, and materiel. The survivors, retreating to the king’s court in Seville, were met by an incredulous ruler who now found himself in the humiliating position of having to sue for peace with the enemy.123 Plagued for



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

215

the past few years with a chronic ailment that had limited his political involvement, Alfonso X had previously been content to turn over much of the d ­ ay-to-day management of the realm to his heir apparent. At this juncture, however, the trust and confidence he had placed in his son was seriously undermined by Sancho’s irresponsible actions, and henceforth the bonds between the two would be increasingly strained until they reached the inevitable breaking point. As Alfonso’s power and influence over his son progressively waned, Infante Manuel’s relationship with the young prince intensified, to the extent that he would soon become Sancho’s chief source of counsel and guidance. During the month of August, Infante Sancho had journeyed ­southeast to Cuenca from whence he requested yet another meeting with his uncle Pedro III, who was at that time in Valencia some two hundred kilometres distant. On 26 August, the Aragonese wrote to say that he would be most willing to consult with his nephew on the Feast of the Holy Cross somewhere between Requena and Buñol about seventy kilometres from Valencia.124 Though we have no firm evidence that the conference actually took place, in a letter from Pedro III to Philippe III written a month later in Valencia on 3 October, the Aragonese cites his meeting with Sancho concerning Queen Violante’s return to Castile as an excuse for not having answered the French king’s earlier communiqué.125 Given Pedro’s request to Alfonso X in January with regard to the mission the Castilian had despatched to the court of Aragón in ­Barcelona concerning Queen Violante and the infantes de la Cerda, asking that Infante Manuel be present at future meetings dealing with these issues, it is reasonable to assume that he accompanied Sancho when the young prince met with Pedro on 14 September. Departing from the environs of Requena-Buñol, Infante Sancho proceeded to ­Valladolid, Queen Violante’s own feudal city where, according to the CAX, mother and son “andudieron por las villas de Castilla requiriendo la justiçia.”126 Having no desire to interact with the queen when Alfonso X was still deeply resentful of her abandonment and the exorbitant costs incurred to bring her back from Aragón, Infante Manuel returned to his brother’s court in Seville, where on 11 November he confirmed a royal ­decree as “hermano del rey e su mayordomo.”127 As the year 1279 came to a close, Alfonso X was busy strengthening his ties with the military orders and others whose support he would need in the forthcoming conflict with the emir of Granada, who had, in the king’s estimation, been largely responsible for most of the persistent turmoil in Andalusia since 1275. Between 10 and 31 December, six royal charters were issued in Seville in which we find Infante Manuel confirming once again as “hermano del Rey e su mayordomo.”128

216

Dawn of a Dynasty

On 3 January 1280, Pedro III wrote from Valencia to his brother-in-law Manuel in Seville concerning complaints lodged by the infante with regard to recent armed incursions into Castilian territory carried out by Juan Pérez de Vallobar and his foot soldiers, who subsequently retired to Biar with their booty from whence the malefactor was attempting to raise a company of soldiers to create even greater mischief in the region.129 Only nine kilometres distant from Villena, seat of Infante ­Manuel’s demesne in the kingdom of Murcia, Biar was in Aragonese territory and one of the primary towns demarcating the boundary b ­ etween Aragón and Castile established in the 1244 Treaty of Almizra. Armed forays across the porous border were frequent and a constant source of irritation for both nations. Scarcely a month later, the ­Aragonese monarch was in Biar, from whence he despatched a ­letter to the town council of Murcia excusing himself for his inability to respond favorably to their request for an assurance of protection for the citizens of Murcia and their belongings from raids originating in Castilian territory, and specifically the Señorío de Villena controlled by Infante Manuel.130 In the meantime, Infante Manuel remained in Seville with his brother, where he confirmed a royal charter on 11 January.131 During these months, according to the CAX, Alfonso X was determined to take action against the emir of Granada, who had for so long caused him so much grief, and to this end he convoked an assembly in B ­ adajoz where he would consider the best means by which to accomplish this goal.132 Badajoz had been chosen to facilitate the collaboration of ­Alfonso’s eighteen-year-old grandson, Dinis, who had acceded to the throne of Portugal upon the death of his father Alfonso III in February 1279. The CAX informs us that “King Alfonso left Seville and arrived in Badajoz accompanied by his brother Infante Don Manuel and he sent for his son and heir Infante Don Sancho who was in Castile and León imparting justice and for his other sons the infantes Don Pedro, Don Juan, and Don Jaime” (73.205). Though the CAX states that the assembly took place in October 1279, we know that Alfonso X was in Badajoz from at least 8 February to 2 March 1280.133 Because Dinis had recently quarrelled with his mother Beatrice, Alfonso’s daughter, and was afraid the Castilian might forcibly place him in his mother’s custody, Alfonso X suggested that the meeting between them take place in Elvas some three leagues distant from Badajoz. The CAX subsequently reports that the king “sent his son Infante Sancho and his brother Infante Manuel together with his sons the infantes Don Pedro, Don Juan, and Don Jaime to plead with his grandson to come to Badajoz” (73.206). After detaining the Castilian embassy in Elvas for three days, however, Dinis



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

217

ultimately decided not to travel to Badajoz and returned to Lisbon, whereupon Alfonso X “returned to Seville. And Infante Don Sancho and the other infantes his brothers travelled to Castile to assemble their troops to join the army on the frontier” (73.206). Conspicuously absent in this last account by the CAX is any mention of Infante Manuel, who apparently did not accompany either the king on his return to Seville or Sancho and his brothers to Castile. The ­sovereign was back in Seville on 1 March, when he issued an order to the town councils of the bishopric of Cartagena requiring them to pay the diezmos e primicias or tithes and first fruits owed to the church, warning them that if they failed to do so he would send “Dia Sánchez de Bustamante, governor of the province of Murcia for my brother, Infante Don Manuel, or any other who may be in charge there in his stead.”134 On 22 April, the king wrote to Diego Sánchez Bustamante himself, ordering him to enforce the law requiring clerics who had ­received land grants to pay the same taxes as the settlers who ­occupied those lands.135 Three days later, Alfonso X again wrote to the governor requiring him to enforce payment of the irrigation tax.136 From these three instances, we may conclude that Infante Manuel was not in the kingdom of ­Murcia; otherwise he himself would have undertaken the duties ­adscribed to his adelantado mayor, and, indeed, there is some uncertainty concerning just who held the office at that juncture. I am inclined to believe that once again Infante Manuel accompanied his nephew Infante Sancho, this time in the critical matter of assembling an army to invade the kingdom of Granada. In fact, we have no hard evidence of Manuel’s whereabouts until the beginning of summer, when we find him in Murcia. On 22 June 1280, Infante Manuel despatched a charter to the town council of Elche reconfirming previous donations he had made to them of houses, land, and water rights that the members of the council were now authorized to buy, sell, or evaluate and place on the tax rolls, ­indicating there was a need to amend the previous rules prohibiting alienation of property designated for settlement purposes, thus providing for a more flexible approach to the colonization of the infante’s domain in Murcia.137 Perhaps the rules requiring lands colonized in the ­kingdom of Murcia to be held by Christian settlers for at least five years had been too strictly enforced and were now seen as detrimental to the settlement process, which had not moved forward at the pace either Manuel or his brother the king had hoped for. At the same time, the proximate Christian invasion of the kingdom of Granada led by Infante Sancho would require the goodwill and support of all the colonists in the nearby kingdom of Murcia. The young crown prince, following his

218

Dawn of a Dynasty

father’s orders, had managed to raise a sizeable army in the north and was now heading south from Valladolid to invade the plane of G ­ ranada. Alfonso X was, at that time and according to the CAX, incapacitated by a recrudescence of his old illness, a squamous cell carcinoma of the maxillary antrum that had manifested itself as “vna dolençia de dolor que ovo en el [vn] ojo quel ouiera a perder.”138 On 23 June, the CAX further informs us that Sancho, who by that time had reached Alcalá de Benzayde, despatched the vanguard of the invasionary forces, headed by the master of the Order of Santiago, Gonzalo Ruiz Girón, to seize the Mudéjar castle of Moclín, some two leagues distant. There the master and his men were ambushed by ­Sarracins who slaughtered 2,800 Christian mounted troops and foot soldiers. So great was the devastation wrought among the knights of the Order of Santiago that Alfonso X was subsequently obliged to combine the remnants of the Santiaguistas with the knights of the newly created Order of Santa María de España under the leadership of Grand Master ­Pedro Núñez. We should not underestimate the despair, the anguish and desolation such an event must have triggered in Infante Manuel, who had since 1261 spent much of his adult life as a faithful confrère of the ­Order. In one fell swoop, his essential political and spiritual identity as a knight of the most powerful and influential military establishment in the realm had been obliterated, and he must certainly have felt that this was yet another disaster that could be attributed to the increasingly irrational behaviour of his brother the king. Manuel was still in Murcia on 7 July when he received a communiqué from his brother-in-law Pedro III, who was at that time engaged in the siege of Balaguer (Fig. 29) and now attempting to assuage the infante’s indignation at having been snubbed during a recent sojourn into Aragonese territory.139 Pedro’s conciliatory attitude towards ­Manuel is patent throughout the despatch, and the monarch’s promise to secure the intervention of his close friend and advisor, the procurator general of the kingdom of Valencia, Rodrigo Jiménez de Luna, was no doubt a significant element in his ploy to pacify Infante Manuel. Luna was well known to the Castilian prince from his tenure as the governor of Valencia since 1276, his prominence among the Aragonese nobility, and the fact that he was, like Infante Manuel, a knight of the Order of ­Santiago, all of which was intended to send a reassuring message to P ­ edro’s indignant relative.140 Furthermore, a year earlier on 10 July 1279, Pedro III had chosen Luna to determine in consonance with ­Alfonso X and Infante Sancho the towns and castles that belonged to the realms of Aragón and Castile respectively.141 Why was Pedro so solicitous towards Infante Manuel? If we remember that Infante Sancho and Pedro



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

219

III had earlier contrived to keep the young de la Cerda princes imprisoned in Játiva in order to secure Sancho’s path to the throne, such a stratagem implies that Infante Manuel must have been intricately involved in the matter for, after all, Játiva was barely seventy kilometres from his stronghold in Villena, and his complicity in the matter would have been critical. It is even conceivable that one of Infante Manuel’s excursions into Aragonese territory encompassed a brief visit to assess the conditions under which the de la Cerda children were being held in the fortress of Játiva, and certainly their welfare and uncertain future would continue to play a decisive role in peninsular politics for many years to come. Manuel was still in Murcia on 6 August when he bestowed upon ­Yecla the laws and privileges of Lorca.142 From early August to the middle of October, however, we have no documentary evidence detailing his whereabouts, and it was precisely during this period that Alfonso X decided to take vengeance on his almojarife Don Zag de la Malea, whom he blamed for the disasterous outcome of the siege of ­Algeciras. Don Zag had, as mentioned above, turned over the tax revenues destined for the blockade to Infante Sancho, who used them to fund Queen V ­ iolante’s return to Castile. The CAX informs us that Alfonso, “to shame Infante Sancho for the grief he had caused him” (74.209), had the Jewish tax collector executed in the square outside Sancho’s lodgings in Seville where he was staying with his brothers. The king’s actions, according to the CAX, left the crown prince “en grant querella del rey” (74.210), effectively setting Sancho on a course of action that would shortly thereafter lead to a rebellion against his father’s rule. Whether or not Infante Manuel was witness to these proceedings in Seville, given the close relationship he had with his own Jewish a­ lmojarife, “Don Çag, el de Don Manuel,” who had most recently played a major role in collecting usury taxes from the Jews of Burgos intended to support Sancho in raising an army in northern Castile, the proceedings would most certainly have dismayed him and left him wondering whether or not his own tax collector was now at risk. This particular episode, then, is equally important for determining Manuel’s future alignment with Sancho’s insurrection. During much of the year and especially the fall of 1280, Alfonso X had remained in constant contact with Philippe III of France in an effort to find a mutually satisfactory solution to the pressing problem of how best to provide for his disinherited grandchildren, Alfonso and ­Fernando de la Cerda. For many months, the Castilian had surreptitiously engaged the considerable diplomatic talents of his brother-in-law Edward I of England to reach a modus vivendi with the children’s uncle,

220

Dawn of a Dynasty

but without much success in the face of Infante ­ Sancho’s staunch ­opposition. ­Finally, through the good offices of Charles of Salerno, son of Alfonso’s archenemy Charles of Anjou, it was agreed that the two ­opposing monarchs would attempt to resolve their differences by meeting at the end of ­December, not face to face but in close proximity, with Alfonso X travelling to Bayonne and Philippe III to Mont-de-Marsan, roughly one ­hundred kilometres apart. Setting out from Seville with his retinue around the second week of October, the king arrived in ­Burgos at the beginning of November. Though we have no evidence that ­Infante ­Manuel accompanied him, he may have been part of the royal entourage, which the CAX informs us included “all of the king’s sons” (74.211). In the meantime, Pedro III wrote to Infante Manuel on 19 October from Alzira in response to an embassy despatched by Manuel to the Aragonese monarch protesting certain incursions around Biar by Conrado Lancia and seeking reparation (Fig. 30).143 The significance Infante Manuel attached to the delegation may be gleaned from the prominence of the four dignitaries he despatched to meet with the king: Juan Pérez, archdeacon of Murcia;144 Pedro Fernández de Pina, a scion of the noble house of Pina in Castellón whose family had fought alongside Jaime I in the conquest of Valencia and with Infante Alfonso in the conquest of Murcia, and were later respected members of the court of Pedro III;145 Pedro Martínez de Jovera, a trusted retainer of Manuel’s whom the infante had in 1277 designated one of the four partitioners of Elche and in 1284 was appointed by the town council of Elche to meet with Manuel’s widow Beatrice to determine who would succeed their now-deceased feudal lord;146 and Alfonso Fernández, the illegitimate son of Alfonso X and Infante Manuel’s nephew, who had most recently accompanied Infante Pedro in the ill-fated siege of Algeciras. Conrado was a cousin of the queen of Aragón, Constance, daughter of the late King Manfred of Sicily and Beatrice of Savoy and half-sister of Beatrice Contesson, the wife of Infante Manuel. Both Conrado and Constance were direct descendants of Emperor Frederick II and his common-law wife, Bianca Lancia.147 According to Muntaner, the young Conrado, with his sister Margarita and Roger de Lauria, accompanied the fifteen-year-old princess Constance to the court of Aragón in 1262, where she would marry the future Pedro III.148 Both Conrado and Roger soon became close friends and advisors to Pedro, who eventually knighted them, marrying Roger to Conrado’s sister, Margarita. In time, Roger and Margarita’s daughter Beatrice married Jaime II de Xérica, becoming the mother of Jaime III de Xérica of whom Juan ­Manuel would later claim “es vno de los omnes del mundo que yo mas amo et por



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

221

ventura non amo a otro tanto commo a él.”149 On 19 April 1278, Pedro III appointed Conrado lancia admiral of the armada in Valencia, investing him on 17 November 1279 with the feudal town, castle, and farms of Albaida.150 It would appear, then, that the raids on Biar during the fall of 1280, attributed to Conrado Lancia by the emissaries of Infante Manuel, had originated in the admiral’s recently acquired domain of Albaida scarcely thirty kilometres distant from Biar. Alfonso X had just arrived in Burgos when he received a letter from Pedro III dated 4 November acknowledging receipt of the Castilian’s earlier message delivered by Jordán de Podio and excusing himself for having been unable to meet with his brother-in-law due to the ongoing war in Cataluña.151 Below this letter on the same folio, we find a brief entry stating “Send to the same king a document accrediting Dalmacio de Villarasa as our embassador, etc. Given in Teruel on 9 November 1280,” and below that another entry: “Send the same credentials to Infante Manuel.”152 The fact that Pedro forwarded the same credentials in two separate despatches would seem to indicate that Alfonso X and Infante Manuel were not together in Burgos, though lacking any further evidence we cannot be sure. Nine days later, Pedro III wrote to his magistrates and bailiff of the coastal town of Guardamar, twenty kilometres to the south of Infante Manuel’s own seaport of Santa Pola, informing them that Gilabert and García Ferrando Terrer together with Berenguer Girones, merchants and vassals of the king, had appeared before him to deliver a letter that Infante Manuel had previously despatched to these same officials requesting them to restore to the affected merchants and their colleague Arnaldo Ogier all goods and duties imposed on them. The king, having heard the merchants’ pleas, commanded that full restitution be made.153 Once again, we see how Pedro III continued to make every effort to indulge Infante Manuel, whose support of the Aragonese at this particular juncture was crucial. In the meantime, Alfonso X had travelled to Bayonne where he entered into negotiations with Philippe III, stationed in nearby Mont-de-Marsan, in an attempt to reach some sort of compromise that would provide the de la Cerda children with appropriate titles and land in Castile or León. We have documentary evidence of the monarch’s presence in Bayonne on 30 December and immediately afterward in Vitoria on 9 January, so the discussions must have taken place between the last week of December and the first week of January. ­Alfonso X offered to create a separate kingdom for Alfonso de la Cerda in Jaén where he would be a vassal of Infante Sancho. The heir to the throne, however, was violently opposed to the arrangement, instead arguing that

222

Dawn of a Dynasty

it would be to everyone’s advantage for his father to form an alliance at this point in time with Pedro III, since the king of France would not easily be able to overcome the combined forces of Castile and Aragón. Alfonso agreed, and the talks with Philippe III were ­broken off.154 It is quite possible that Sancho would not have been able to persuade his father of the practicality of such an arrangement without the support and counsel of Infante Manuel, suggesting that he was present with the royal entourage in Bayonne. Alfonso X, however, had now turned his attention to the forthcoming marriages in Burgos of his two younger sons: Pedro to Marguerite, sister of Aymeri IV, viscount of Narbonne, and Juan to Marguerite, daughter of the king’s son-in-law William VII of Montferrat and his first wife, Isabel de Clare.155 The king had ­arrived in Burgos during the first week of February, and the weddings were scheduled to take place around the end of the month. While we have no documentary evidence of Infante Manuel’s whereabouts until March 1281, we may be sure that both he and his wife Contesson were present for the wedding ceremonies given their close relationship to the ­betrothed couples. Infante Manuel was the uncle of the infantes Pedro and Juan and of Beatrice, wife of William VII of Montferrat, who was also Contesson’s nephew, the son of her half-sister Marguerite and Boniface II of ­Montferrat. Marguerite of Narbonne, sister of Aymeri IV, was the first cousin of Contesson’s mother Cecile des Baux, and her marriage to Infante Pedro had first been considered in Narbonne as early as 1275 when Alfonso and Manuel passed through there on their return trip from Beaucaire to see the pope.156 The marquess of Montferrat had been ­imprisoned a year earlier by another of Contesson’s nephews, ­Tomasino of Savoy, who had agreed to release his prisoner upon payment of £6,000 viennois, and William was now making plans with his cousin Thomas of Saluzzo, Alfonso X, and Pedro III of Aragón to invade the County of Savoy. Thomas of Saluzzo was Contesson’s nephew, the son of her half-sister Beatrice of Savoy and Manfred III of Saluzzo. When ­Manfred III died in 1244, Beatrice of Savoy married Manfred ­Hohenstaufen, and their daughter Constance, Thomas of Saluzzo’s half-sister, subsequently married the future Pedro III in 1262. A year earlier, in 1280, Pedro III had written to both William and Thomas pledging military support for their campaign: “We will aid you, the marquesses of Montferrat and Saluzzo, to obtain and hold the lands which the House of Savoy has and holds in Lombardy.”157 Now, on 15 February 1281, a few days before the weddings in Burgos, ­Pedro III wrote to Thomas excusing himself from providing the promised aid due to previous commitments to his cousin William of Montferrat



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

223

together with some rather surprising comments concerning his current troubled relationship with Alfonso X: “Since we are currently under heavy pressure because the king of Castile is acting contrary to our will and because he is more powerful than we, ... you must know that we are unable at present to provide you with military aid, ... as you can verify with the noble marquess of Montferrat who for some time now has been with the king of Castile and will soon arrive in the region ... if, however, peace is to be had between us and the king of Castile, we must first provide military aide to the marquess of Montferrat in the matter of the County of Savoy.”158 As of 15 February, then, the weddings had not yet taken place, and the Aragonese monarch was anxiously trying to find a way to placate his brother-in-law Alfonso X, his wife’s half-brother Thomas of Saluzzo, and her cousin William of Montferrat, all of whom were the sworn enemies of the Guelf factions in southern Italy headed by Charles of Anjou, uncle of the king of France, and in northern Italy by Tomasino of Savoy, Contesson’s nephew. Looming on the horizon for Pedro III was the certainty of armed conflict with Charles of Anjou, who had usurped his wife Constance’s rights to the throne of Sicily and who currently enjoyed the full support of Philippe III of France and the newly elected pope, Martin IV. In the midst of this political turmoil, Infante Manuel was about to make a fateful decision. Would he continue to support his infirm and often irrational brother Alfonso X, whose weak and indecisive management of the de la Cerda inheritance and the economy of his kingdom had effectively alienated Sancho and Philippe III, or align his fortunes with the heir apparent and his brother-in-law, the king of Aragón, both of whom were resolutely determined to preserve their political and territorial integrity in the face of mounting threats by the French? On 18 February 1281, Pedro III wrote again to Alfonso X referring to the forthcoming discussions between the two sovereigns and the role Infante Manuel and others had played in arranging them.159 In his customary non-confrontational style, Pedro III seeks to reassure Alfonso X of his constant friendship and goodwill. He has never opposed the ­Castilian, as Infante Manuel will confirm, and is prepared to prove his devotion in any way Alfonso may deem fitting. At this juncture, ­Manuel is clearly in Pedro’s camp and inclined to vouch for the veracity and integrity of the Aragonese monarch in his forthcoming negotiations with Alfonso X. The Castilian ambassador, Don Jordán de Podio, was a member of a noble Aragonese family that had participated in the conquest of Valencia and Murcia, having become over the years a trusted adviser to the king and Infante Manuel.160 He received ­extensive land grants in Cudiacibit and Benavía during the partition of

224

Dawn of a Dynasty

Murcia where he was alcalde del Rey and in 1274 was awarded the municipality of Ceutí.161 His frequent involvement in diplomatic missions during the reign of Pedro III is particularly noteworthy for the highly confidential nature of the negotiations conducted under his guidance, and in the coming months, he would confirm the Treaty of Campillo ceding Infante Manuel’s holding in the Valle de Ayora to Pedro III. Immediately following the royal weddings in Burgos, Infante ­Manuel travelled to Tardajos, some ten kilometres to the northwest, from whence on 5 March he despatched a heartfelt petition to the town council of Burgos pleading with them to reconsider a tax they had recently levied on several houses owned by Urraca and Marina García, the daughters of his old nursemaid, Doña Toda (Fig. 31): From me, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, to the council and magistrates of Burgos, greetings and salutations to those good men whom I love well and in whom I trust and wish well. Know that Doña Urraca and Marina García, daughters of Doña Toda, my ama, informed me that you demand they pay taxes on several homes which they have in your city and that you never required them to pay until now and I therefore earnestly entreat you in the name of the love you have for me, that you rescind the tax and if there is anything you may have confiscated or taken from them in this regard, that you restore these things unto them and in so doing you will have pleased me and done me a favour for which I will be most grateful. And you should consider doing this for two reasons: one, because they are nuns in the service of God, and the other, for the relationship they have with me.162

Infante Manuel’s connection with Urraca and Marina García is clear, though the identification of their mother, Doña Toda, is not. It is possible that she was one of two sisters, Toda and Urraca, of García Fernández de Villamayor, majordomo to Queen Berenguela and King Fernando III and ayo or guardian of the future Alfonso X.163 Toda and Urraca ­Fernández were married to two brothers, Martín and Pedro Martínez, and while it may only be a coincidence, “Doña Toda” is cited in the Repartimiento de Murcia numerous times as an important landowner, “the wife of Corvo Ibáñez” and “mother-in-law of Pedro Martínez.”164 Furthermore, García Fernández had seven children with his second wife Mayor Arias, among whom were Juan García, majordomo of ­Alfonso X, and Marina and Urraca García.165 In 1223, García Fernández purchased the monastery of San Vicente in Villamayor de los Montes thirty kilometres south of Burgos, converting it into the Cistercian convent of Santa María de Villamayor in which many of his female relatives



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

225

and descendants lived and served, including a Marina García who in 1286 confirms a document there as its cilleriza or majordomo.166 While it seems very likely, then, that Doña Toda and her two daughters Urraca and Marina belonged to the extended family of García Fernández, the exact nature of their relationship remains uncertain.167 Returning to Burgos, Infante Manuel joined Alfonso X and Infante Sancho as the royal entourage was making its way slowly south from Burgos to San Esteban de Gormaz, where on 10 March the sovereign issued a privilege to the town council of Orihuela, located between ­Murcia and Manuel’s domain in Elche, supporting its right to control the purchase and sale of farmland recently contested by previous owners who had falsified royal charters.168 At this juncture, the king openly alludes to a legislative triumvirate now ruling the country: Alfonso X, Sancho, and Manuel. The monarch himself seems acutely aware of his own inability to govern unaided and cites with ever-increasing frequency the reality of shared governance that had now become the norm. By this time, Infante Manuel had risen to a position of such persuasion and authority that even the usually impartial Torres Fontes is constrained to cite the “all powerful dominance ... of that opaque figure whose presence was to be found everywhere with evidence of his m ­ alicious intervention in the affairs of his brother and the decisive influence he wielded over his nephew,” sentiments that again reveal the usual mistrust and suspicion we have already noted on the part of those historians who misconstrue the infante’s motives because they know so little about him.169 From San Esteban de Gormaz, the court proceeded to Osma and Soria and then on to Campillo between Ágreda and Tarazona, where the Castilians entered into negotiations with Pedro III that would culminate in the treaties of Campillo and Ágreda. Alfonso X had taken Sancho’s advice to form an alliance with Pedro III, and the CAX summarizes both the rationale for the journey and the results of the summit: “The king sent word to the king of Aragón proposing that they meet together. And King Pedro came to Tarazona and King Alfonso came to Ágreda and they met with one another and stated their views in such a way that they remained friends. And King Pedro received from King Alfonso the castles of Valle de Ayora which belonged to his brother Infante Don Manuel and in exchange he gave him the town of Escalona on the condition that whenever his heirs might recover the castles that they would return Escalona to King Alfonso or to whomever might rule after him” (75.212–13) (Figs. 32, 33). The strategic Valle de Ayora on the frontier between Valencia and Castile formed a natural north-south corridor funnelling commerce

226

Dawn of a Dynasty

from Aragón into the towns of the kingdom of Murcia held by Infante Manuel: Almansa, Villena, Elda, Novelda, Aspe, Elche, and the seaport of Santa Pola. The agreements signed on 27–28 March were entirely favourable to Pedro III, while Alfonso X appeared to gain little if any advantage in the negotiations. Some concessions made by Sancho were clearly contrary to his father’s express wishes and motivated by his personal desire to create a strong alliance with his uncle Pedro who, with the infantes de la Cerda in his custody, had now become the crucial ­arbiter in the matter of the succession to the throne of Castile.170 While the CAX, with its anti-Alfonsine bias, appears to cite Infante ­Manuel’s loss of the Valle de Ayora as a primary source of his immediate ­disatisfaction with Alfonso X, it must be remembered that Manuel and Sancho, in the context of the king’s intensifying physical and mental instability, had colluded closely with Pedro III during the past year and were fully anticipating Sancho’s imminent rise to power, when ­Manuel would be amply compensated for these summary deprivations. The first treaty to be signed in Campillo by Alfonso X and Pedro III on 27 March was an alliance between the two monarchs in which the Aragonese promised to honour the agreement together with his son and heir, Infante Alfonso, and his brother King Jaime II of Mallorca, while the Castilian pledged his loyalty together with his son and heir, Infante Sancho, and his brother Infante Manuel, emphasizing once again the recently adopted tripartite feature of royal power in Castile.171 In fact, when the king’s brother confirms, “Yo Inffante Don Manuel el ­sobredicho fuy present en todas estas cosas que sobredichas son, et pus mio seello en esta carta en testimonio,” his signature comes immediately after the date of the document and is the first of all the subsequent signatories, including Infante Sancho, an indication of his current ­exalted standing in these transactions. That same day, Infante Manuel confirmed a document in which he personally guaranteed to hand over to Pedro III the castles and towns of Ayora and Palazuelos, warranting his execution of the terms of the transfer with an astounding and unexpected declaration of homage to the ruler of Aragón (Fig. 34): Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Manuel, son of King Ferrando of happy memory, promise you Don Pedro, by the grace of God, illustrious king of Aragón, and solemnly swear to return to you or to ­whomever you wish within three weeks following the Feast of the ­Resurrection, the castle and town of Ayora and the castle and town of Palazuelos with all the boundaries and appurtenances and rights of the aforesaid castles and locales. In addition to the above-mentioned castles



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

227

and places we concede to you, we will, in the interim, be looking out for them and meanwhile will arrange to possess them in your name. And for reasons of greater security, we then do homage to you and swear thus to be attentive and comply. Given this day in Campillo between Ágreda and Tarazona on 6 Kalends April in the year of our Lord 1281 and 1319 of the Era.172

During the negotiations later the same day in Ágreda, Sancho too declared himself a vassal of Pedro III in four separate documents: “And so that these things may be more secure and more valid, I solemnly swear homage to you and swear on the Holy Gospels to keep and hold all these things even as they are stipulated in this contract.”173 It would appear that Alfonso X, while present for the initial discussions in Campillo, did not accompany the negotiators to Ágreda or Tarazona, allowing Sancho and Infante Manuel to swear fealty to Pedro III without the king’s knowledge.174 On 1 April 1281, Pedro III wrote to Infante Manuel from Tarazona informing him that he was sending his vassal Ramón de Palau of the royal house of Aragón to take possession of the castles and towns in the Valle de Ayora.175 Ramón was very likely a descendant of the person of the same name who had been a high-ranking member of the court of Jaime I and whose granddaughter, Sibilia de Palau, countess of Ampurias and vicountess of Bas, swore homage to Pedro III on 12 ­October 1278 for castles she held in fief from him.176 On 17 May 1280, Ramón was ordered by Pedro III to recover a debt owed by the bailiff of Zaragoza,177 and on 14 November 1282, he confirmed a charter assigning the fortress of Castellver to Ferrer de Castelló in the name of Crown Prince Alfonso.178 During the last week of April 1281, the king and his court were in ­Toledo, where he despatched a privilege to the Order of Santiago and its master, Don Pedro Núñez, ceding to them the castle and town of Cieza in exchange for the “village and castle of Abanilla which we took from them to give to Don Ramón, son of Don Guillén de Rocafull.”179 Infante Manuel had accompanied Alfonso to Toledo and duly confirmed the document as “the king’s brother and his majordomo.”180 The significance of this particular transfer, one that might easily have been overlooked in the normal course of events, is brought clearly into focus by a miracle recounted in Cantiga 382, shedding light on an intriguing and little-known facet of peninsular politics during this time involving Infante Manuel and, ultimately, his son and heir Juan Manuel.181 The narrative details of the miracle are uncomplicated: A “ric-ome” or nobleman by the name of Ramón de Rocafull petitioned the king

228

Dawn of a Dynasty

for the restoration of a grant of land in “Alvaça,” which the king was obligated to give him – “que de dar têudo ll’era” (vv. 13–14). Alfonso X, however, was unable to keep his promise because he had already ceded these lands to members of an unnamed religious order whom the author of the cantiga refers to as “monges” (v. 48). The king continued to promise Rocafull that he would provide for him as soon as he could, but having already spent many days in Seville awaiting the illusive grant, Rocafull became exasperated by the high cost of living in the city and the realization that he would not be able to continue there much longer. Subsequently, during his next royal audience, he threatened to return to the kingdom of Aragon if Alfonso X would not immediately enfeoff him. The monarch was greatly upset by this attempt to force his hand because Rocafull was his natural vassal whom he had raised as one of his own and whose marriage in Toledo he had himself arranged. When ­Alfonso once again dismisses Rocafull with the same assurance, the desperate knight, leaving the king’s presence, kneels down to the ­Virgin in prayer. If she will but plant in the monarch’s mind the suggestion that he grant the monks some other lands in exchange for ­“Alvaça,” he will give to the church of Santa María del Puerto ten pounds of “bõa çera,” good wax, an expensive commodity in those times. Even as R ­ ocafull prayed, the king was conferring with his brother, Infante Manuel, and together they decided to arrange for the knight exactly what he had just implored. They forthwith summoned the palace guards to go after him and bring Ramón into their presence if he had not yet departed. Finding him outside the palace, the guards led him before the king and his brother Manuel. When he was informed of their favourable decision, the astonished Rocafull explained how he had just pleaded with the Virgin to lead them to this very same conclusion. Who was Ramón de Rocafull and what was his relationship to the king and Infante Manuel? The Rocafulls were relatives of María Guillem, wife of Pedro II of Aragón and mother of Jaime I, Alfonso’s father-in-law. Zurita informs us that in her several wills dated 1209 and 1211, María bequeathed her inheritance in the domain of Montpellier to her infant son Jaime and, in case of his demise, to her daughters; and if they were deceased, to Ramón I de Rocafull and his brother Arnaldo de Rocafull.182 The Rocafulls, then, were trusted retainers of the king of Aragón and blood relatives of Alfonso’s wife, Queen V ­ iolante. Ramón and his son, Guillén I de Rocafull, are recorded as having been present during the siege of Valencia in 1238,183 and Ramón was commander of the Order of the Templars in Valencia on 13 N ­ ovember 1240.184 We last 185 hear of Ramón in 1252. His son Guillén I was named “lloctinent” or viceroy of Montpellier around 1258186 and was sent to France in that



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

229

year by Jaime I to coordinate the marriage of his daughter Isabel to Philippe, son of King Louis IX.187 Five years later, on 5 May 1263, Guillén was despatched to the court of the late Count Amadeus IV of Savoy to arrange the marriage of Jaime’s son, Infante Jaime of M ­ allorca, to the count’s daughter, Beatrice Contesson, though as we know, nothing came of the venture.188 Several years later, during the siege of Murcia in December 1265, Guillén fought alongside Infante Manuel, entering that city triumphant in February 1266.189 In recognition of his considerable service, Alfonso X awarded Guillén the castle and village of Alpera on 13 September 1266.190 Three months earlier, on 15 July 1266, Guillén had been appointed royal procurator for Jaime I to negotiate once again the marriage of Beatrice Contesson to Infante Jaime of Mallorca.191 The union never came about, and two years later Beatrice married Pierre de Chalon. Pierre died shortly after and Beatrice then married Infante ­Manuel in the fall of 1275, and it is quite possible that Guillén de ­Rocafull may have had a hand in arranging their union. As members of the ruling families of Aragón and Castile, Guillén and Infante Manuel were close colleagues. In January 1279, Pedro III wrote to his brother-in-law Alfonso X, acknowledging receipt of an embassy recently despatched to the Aragonese court in Barcelona by the king of Castile to solicit support for the blockade of Algeciras: “Know your ­excellency that your brother, the eminent Don Manuel, was here to see me together with Ferrán Pérez, dean of Seville, Guillén, son of Ramón de Rocafull, and your justice, Master Jacobo de las Leyes, bringing ­letters from you certified by the same Don Manuel.”192 Guillén probably died some time before 1281, the chronological context of Cantiga 382, and his son, Ramón II, subsequently sought to have his father’s domain of “Alvaça” revert to him. Both Hernández Serna and Torres Fontes believe that the “Alvaça” of the cantiga may well refer to the alquería of Alguazas in Murcia but, in any case, we may be sure that “Alvaça” is a scribal error for Abanilla.193 We have historical evidence that Ramón de Rocafull was present in Montpellier on 9 February 1277 when the nobles of that seignory swore fealty to the newly proclaimed king of Aragón, Pedro III,194 and we may surmise that as a young man Alfonso X had received him in 1266 at his court in Seville following the siege and liberation of Murcia by the combined forces of Jaime I of Aragón and the Catalán and Castilian ­nobles accompanied by Infante Manuel. This would account for the distress the monarch feels in the poem when he recalls how he had raised Ramón de Rocafull and arranged his marriage in Toledo. From here, we must continue to theorize. We know that upon his accession to the throne Pedro III was immediately faced with a rebellion

230

Dawn of a Dynasty

by the nobles of Catalunya headed by his brother Jaime II of Mallorca. The insurgents threatened to ally themselves with the French and Charles of Anjou if Pedro would not grant them their independence. It is more than likely that the Rocafulls of Montpellier joined their liege lord Jaime of Majorca against Pedro III and thus would have been at odds with the Rocafulls who had become vassals of Alfonso X after 1266. It is probable that the Valencian Rocafulls sided with the opposition since, following the death of Pedro III in 1285, we find that in 1286 his son and successor, Alfonso III, ordered the seizure of the lands of Juan Rocafull in Valencia “por haber ido en contra el rey, su padre.”195 The “monges” in Cantiga 382 to whom Alfonso X ceded the v ­ illage and castle of Cieza in exchange for the “villa et el castiello de ­Hauaniella que les nos tomamos pora dar a don Remond, fijo de don Guilen de ­Rocaffuel” are the brothers of the Order of Santiago, the confrères of ­Infante Manuel who had done so much to support Jaime I and ­Alfonso X during the Mudéjar revolt of 1264–66.196 The trade of Abanilla for Cieza was highly beneficial to the Order of Santiago, and from the wording of the charter it is clear that an agreement had been reached with Ramón before that date.197 Cantiga 382 tells us that the miracle took place in Seville, and we know that the only period Alfonso X was there immediately prior to 24 April 1281 was between 15 August and the first week of October 1280.198 At that juncture, he left Seville for Bayonne, where he would meet with Philippe III of France. He issued the charter in Toledo on 24 April 1281 on his way home to Seville, where he arrived around 20 August 1281.199 The miracle must have taken place, then, in either August or September 1280. Ramón would have by then been fully reconciled with the king following the miraculous event that led to his possession of Abanilla. He appears as adelantado de Murcia in a document dated 3 August 1284 and was most likely appointed to the post in 1282 by Alfonso X. Soon after Sancho IV acceded to the throne, he was summarily dismissed and replaced by Garci Jofré de Loaysa.200 Ramón died sometime ­before 14 May 1296, when his son Guillén II de Rocafull paid homage to King Jaime II of Aragón “por el castillo de Fabaniella.”201 Years later, in October 1315, Guillén II challenged Juan Manuel to mortal combat for reasons that have never been fully revealed. The challenge was given before the three regents of Castile: María de Molina, Infante Juan, and Infante Pedro. Such was Juan Manuel’s outrage that he never forgave Guillén de Rocafull, who subsequently joined forces with Alfonso XI to thwart Juan Manuel’s influence in Murcia in the year 1328.202 By 12 May 1281, the royal entourage had arrived in Córdoba, where the king issued a privilege ceding Jumilla to Garci Jofré de Loaysa, a



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

231

document duly confirmed by “El infante don Manuel, hermano del rey et su mayordomo.”203 Garci Jofré de Loaysa, son of Jofré de Loaysa, tutor of Queen Violante, was lord of the castle and town of Petrer, ­bordering on Elda in the domain of Infante Manuel, and the king’s cupbearer or copero mayor. He had been present in Campillo on 27 March, where he endorsed the alliance between Alfonso X and Pedro III, and must have also witnessed the documents in which Sancho and Infante Manuel swore allegiance to the king of Aragón.204 Because of his many holdings in Murcia and extensive knowledge of the region, he would be named adelantado mayor del Reyno de Murcia in 1285 following I­ nfante Sancho’s accession to the throne of Castile.205 On 14 May 1281, Infante Manuel countersigned another royal charter granting the castle of Tiñosa to the Order of Calatrava.206 Two weeks later, on 27 May, Alfonso X wrote with instructions to the town council of Orihuela commanding that his orders be promptly enforced by “Diag Sánchez de Bustamante or whoever might then serve as adelantado for my brother Infante Don Manuel in the kingdom of Murcia.”207 By 3 June Infante Sancho, moving south with his men from ­Valladolid, had arrived in Córdoba where he, together with Infante Manuel and his father and brothers, determined that the Castilians should immediately carry out a pre-emptive strike against the emir of Granada. With information provided by the CAX and the Anales toledanos, we know the campaign was directed by Infante Sancho leading companies under the command of his brothers Pedro, Juan, and Alfonso el Niño.208 Unlike in the previous campaign against Granada in June 1280, Alfonso was actively engaged in the conflict. While Infante Manuel is not mentioned by the chronicles, we may assume that, as the monarch’s mayordomo, he had accompanied his brother, who was reported to be “in the middle of his troops.”209 The sovereign, however, had not been well during the campaign and was probably suffering a recurrence of the dropsy that had afflicted him in Vitoria during the winter of 1276–77. Cantiga 367 reports that he was so gravely ill that his swollen legs could not fit into his pants.210 The campaign concluded by 25 June and Alfonso X was back in Córdoba by 5  July. On that same day, Infante Manuel confirmed a privilege granted by his brother to the bishop of Córdoba.211 Shortly thereafter, due to the recent reshuffling of the political map in the kingdom of Murcia so advantageous to Pedro III, Infante ­Manuel set out from Córdoba for Elche, where he was eager to display a physical presence and dispel any doubts the Christian colonists and ­Mudéjar inhabitants of his now depleted domain may have had with regard to the enforcement of rights and privileges he had previously

232

Dawn of a Dynasty

granted them. In the meantime, on 1 August, Pedro III wrote from Lérida to his brother-in-law Alfonso X concerning the forthcoming marriage between Alfonso’s daughter Berenguela and Philip I, Latin emperor of Constantinople. Two revealing paragraphs appended to the end of the letter and commanding copies of the missive to be sent to Infante S ­ ancho and Infante Manuel serve to confirm that the crafty king of Aragón continued to support the concept of a ruling triumvirate in Castile: § another letter to Infante Don Sancho that he may give credence to the information conveyed to him by our squire Andrés de Procida. § A similar letter to Infante Don Manuel.212 By 9 August Infante Manuel had arrived in Elche, where he issued a warning to his adelantado and almojarife, admonishing them to respect and enforce the laws and franchises he had previously dispensed to the town council: From me, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, to my a­ delantado and my almojarife of Elche, those currently occupying these positions and those who will occupy them in the future, salutations to those whom I  love well and in whom I trust. Know that to promote and benefit the town council of Elche, I gave them and authorized laws and franchises which they have in my charters. I therefore command you to keep and uphold these charters and not to trespass against them in any way. Furthermore, you will not seize or confiscate from the inhabitants who are there now, or will be there in future, any entitlements to the goods that they may derive from their land grants, and which they may remove if they wish either by land or by sea, as long as they do not infringe upon my feudal rights. And we hold that they may have free and clear now and forever more all that we have stated above even as it is specified in my other charters and the privilege I gave them when I bestowed upon them these dispensations. And furthermore, in the matter of merchandise, let them trade and pay to my tax collector those amounts which are due even as the inhabitants of Murcia trade and pay them to the tax collector of my brother the king. And do no other than that which I have commanded you or you will be held ­accountable for whatever damage or loss the council may receive and I will hold you responsible for it. Given in Elche on the ninth day of ­August, in the Era of 1319 [1281]. Let the charter, once read, be given to them. I, Johan Pérez de Toledo, had it written at the behest of Don Manuel.213



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

233

The following day, the infante despatched an extensive document detailing various privileges and franchises to the Mudéjar inhabitants of Elche: Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, desirous of promoting and benefiting my Moors who live within Elche and its boundaries, that they may be better served and live in peace, I approve of and command that henceforth none shall be so bold as to contravene nor infringe upon any matter having to do with their traditions which I have authorized and of which they have my charters. And in any suit which Christian or Jew may bring against a Moor, let it be adjudicated by the magistrate of the Moors even as the law commands, except for any amount due to the office of the tax collector which I deem must still be determined by my almojarife who will collect it for me. Furthermore, I command that the Moors may not seek judgment among themselves in suits which they may bring against one another but that they shall go before the Moorish magistrate. Furthermore, any Moor who stands accused, let him be taken into custody or let him be released on bail according to the accusation brought against him and let him have a hearing before his magistrate and let him be judged by his own law. And if it be proved that the accusor may have accused falsely, I direct that he shall be punished according to his own law. I command that all Moors taken into custody be imprisoned in the Moorish jail and that they be guarded by the char medina.214 Furthermore, you are not to assess any new fines against the Moors except for those levies which are legitimately related to my rights or those which I allow you to collect from them either by my verbal or written request, or if they, or a majority of them, agree among themselves to a levy imposed for my service or for those things they may need for the good of their community. Furthermore, in the matter of the gabela215 to be paid by the mosques, I command that it be collected by my magistrate, Aben Hualit Aben Haben Catif, as it is specified in the commission which he has from me and let them pay ... to my tax collector; and let my magistrate, with the advice of the good men [of the council,] choose an almostasán216 whom they believe is suitable for the office. Furthermore, let the almostasán chosen from among the Moors accompany them whenever they leave and return to Elche ... and additionally I command that whomever may serve as the adelantado in my domain shall ensure that the magistrates, the judge, and my almojarife all comply and that they allow no one to contravene the aforementioned rules and they shall ensure that no one comes before him on these matters. And in order that this may be firmly established and there may be no doubt, I commanded my seal to be affixed to this charter. Given

234

Dawn of a Dynasty

in Elche, on the tenth day of August, in the Era of 1319 [1281]. I, ­Domingo Estevan, wrote this at the behest of Don Manuel.217

In the interim between 10 August and 16 December of this same year, Infante Manuel is conspicuously absent from chancery documents, a hiatus that may be explained by his acquisition of the castle and town of Escalona during the recent negotiations in Ágreda and Campillo. He and his wife, Beatrice of Savoy, like many of the king’s closest relatives, were prudently distrustful of the monarch’s erratic and often threatening behaviour brought about by a combination of his constant physical deterioration and increasing mental instability over the past few years. While the political uncertainties in the kingdom of Murcia must have militated against any plans the couple may have had to establish themselves more firmly in the southeast, the relative tranquility of the countryside around the picturesque town and castle of Escalona, rising imposingly above the banks of the Alberche River in the province of Toledo, could only have seemed most welcoming. Having reasserted his authority in Murcia and seen to the welfare of the inhabitants of his domain, Infante Manuel and Beatrice turned towards La Mancha and Escalona, where nine months later their son was born. Several months later, Infante Sancho’s brief but effective assault on Granada together with the protracted conflict in Andalusia against the Marinids had begun to wreak havoc on the royal treasury, and ­Alfonso X once again found himself in dire financial straits. Under the circumstances, the beleaguered monarch was obliged to convoke the cortes in search of desperately needed revenue. Meeting in Seville during the month of October, the assembled delegates were, the CAX relates, compelled “more out of fear than of love” to acquiesce to the monarch’s ruinous request to create a two-tiered monetary system involving both overvalued silver and nearly worthless billon coins.218 Meanwhile, ­Alfonso X secretly continued to contemplate a reasonable resolution to the plight of the infantes de la Cerda by creating a ­kingdom for them in Jaén and, in the process, further alienating an already overly agitated Infante Sancho who, the CAX reports, asked the monarch for permission to repair to Córdoba where he purportedly planned to arrange a truce with Granada, all the while conspiring with his brothers ­Pedro and Juan against their father.219 Infante Manuel, even as the other delegates peremptorily summoned to the cortes, must have felt a certain obligation to attend now tinged with apprehension if he failed to appear. While we have no documentary evidence for his whereabouts before 16 ­December, the information contained in Cantigas 366 and 376 provides a semblance of reality concerning his activities during the fall of 1281, allowing us to draw a more complete picture of the infante at this time.



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

235

Cantiga 366 relates “How Santa María del Puerto helped Don Manuel recover a falcon which he had lost.” The text affirms that the miracle took place in Seville at the time when the king was there and when he had come from Granada, where he had made war on the Moors of that land who were living there and on the many “genetes” [Sp. cenetes, Berber tribesmen of Zenecha] who had come there from Africa; and he did great harm to them damaging grain fields, orchards, and vineyards and everything that his troops found there. And later, after he had accomplished this, the king and his warriors returned to Seville. And the king was extremely ill [mui mal doente foi y a gran maravilla]. But he recovered by the mercy of she who is Mother and Daughter of God, who had already cured him of great illnesses [grandes doores]. And while he was recovering, Don Manuel, his brother, came there and he was sick; and after he recovered and was well, he took his falcons, which he had molted over the summer, and went hunting, which is one of the greatest vices in the world.” (vv. 6–24) The cantiga goes on to narrate that while his birds pursued their prey, Manuel lost one of his best falcons. It flew away to the other side of the Guadalquivir River, and the infante and his companions searched for it without success (vv. 31–3). Over three weeks later, on yet another hunting expedition in the same area, the Llano de Tablada near the village of Coria, Manuel and his falconers spotted the stray bird and prayed to Santa María del Puerto that if she would help them secure it, they would place a wax image of a falcon on her altar (vv. 57–6). Then when Manuel called the bird, it came to him, “e maravilla estrãya foi” (vv. 67–8). Though Ballesteros and Procter ascribe the events of Cantiga 366 to the Mudéjar uprising of April 1264 and the subsequent invasion of the Peninsula by Abu Yusuf in May and June, both were unaware of ­Alfonso’s primary medical conditions, including a squamous cell ­carcinoma of the maxillary antrum and dropsy, which began to manifest after 1270 and were the principal cause of frequent royal illnesses alluded to in not only this particular cantiga but several others.220 ­O’Callaghan more accurately places the events of Cantiga 366 sometime after the settlement charter of El Puerto de Santa María in December 1281. In fact, however, Cantiga 366 informs us that while the king was in Seville ­recuperating from his illness, he was joined by his brother Manuel: “E enquant’ el guareçia, Don Manuel, seu yrmão, / veo e foi enfermo; e pois guariu e foi são” (vv. 20–1). This clearly indicates that Manuel had been ­absent from Seville and had only recently returned. We know that he left the king in Córdoba sometime after 5 July and was in Elche on 9–10 ­August. From there, we surmise that he proceded to Escalona, where he remained until such time as he was

236

Dawn of a Dynasty

apprised of the forthcoming cortes in Seville convoked in ­October, when he would have undoubtedly returned to participate in these ­crucial deliberations. Certainly, if there was any time when we might think that Manuel was sick, it would have been during the fall of 1281. Faced with the increasingly irrational behaviour of his older brother, he was obliged to ponder his own moves for the immediate future, a strategy that would inexorably include a breach of faith with Alfonso X. Whether it was an illness that prompted his return to Seville or whether he was perennially depressed, a malady that would have presented itself with greater intensity at this moment, Infante Manuel now sought to distract himself with long hunting trips to Coria, to the southwest of Seville, along the Guadalquivir, as we are told by Cantiga 366. Furthermore, we know that the events of the miracle take place during the fall, since the poem relates that Manuel went hunting with falcons that had molted during the summer.221 Recently molted falcons, also alluded to in the opening lines of the Cantar de mio Cid, “adtores mudados,” were especially prized since the birds gained in value for each yearly change of feathers, a delicate process that many apparently did not survive.222 Manuel’s falcons had molted during the summer and he was eager to take them hunting that fall. There is another piece of important evidence to consider, one that gives us a more precise time frame for the miracle. The last two stanzas tell us that when Manuel finally managed to attract the falcon with his calls, he was “in a field where plowmen with their oxen were plowing” (vv. 68–70). Under the old Roman system of biennial rotation that prevailed in post-conquest Christian Andalusia, plowing for winter grains was undertaken in October or November.223 In the fall of 1281, Alfonso had arrived in Seville by 20 August; Manuel joined him there sometime later but certainly by the October-November plowing season that coincided with the convocation of the cortes. Cantiga 376 takes place in the royal palace of Seville and relates how King Alfonso showed Manuel a beautiful jasper ring set in gold that he had recently acquired. The infante’s admiration for the gem provoked the monarch’s legendary generosity and he promised to give it to his brother. Manuel subsequently returned to his own quarters and the sovereign decided, apparently on impulse, to have a messenger deliver the ring at once. On the way, the courier lost the ring. He prayed to the Virgin to help him find it, and at that moment a man approached him on the street enquiring whether he had lost a ring, to which the messenger replied that he had indeed. Persuaded by a textual reference to the royal fleet, Ballesteros was disposed to date the cantiga to 1260, the year of the Salé naval expedition.224



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

237

The cantiga, however, recounts in the most demonstrative terms that Alfonso X loved his brother, who had spent his life in service to the king: “de chão; / e o ben que ll’el fezera / non lle sayra en vão, / ca en servi-lo sa vida / avia despenduda” (vv. 16–18), praise hardly consonant with the infante’s relatively modest achievements in 1260 when he was only twenty-six years old. While there are no notable historical facts to be gleaned from this particular cantiga, we may be fairly certain that the circumstances are coincident with the ­chronological context of Cantiga 366.225 Infante Manuel had returned to Seville after suffering an illness whose severity we must not underestimate. That ailment and Alfonso’s ongoing attempts to rectify the disinheritance of the de la Cerda children with lands obtained at the expense of the infante’s feudal domain were, no doubt, significant considerations that may well have prompted the king to be sentimentally disposed towards his ailing youngest sibling with terms of devotion that would ring hollow scarcely five months later. The gemstone referenced in Cantiga 376 is a “jaspis ... pedra nobre connosçuda” (v. 23), amply depicted in the king’s own Lapidario (c. 1276), which lists no fewer than five separate varieties of this g ­ emstone: “The gemstone which is called yzf and which we refer to as iaspio is of the twentieth degree of the sign of Aries. This gemstone is by nature hot and dry. It is also present in five different types.”226 We may assume that of the five varieties of jasper, Alfonso X had one of the two considered to be superior to the others: the tuminon, or white-wine-coloured jasper, or the even more precious astarnuz. In any case, all five types have one virtue in common: they relieve the symptoms of anxiety and despondency associated with melancholy, the medieval term for depression. Certainly Infante Manuel’s state of mind at this particular juncture could be described as troubled, perhaps despondent, because of his brother’s erratic behaviour in the matter of the infantes de la Cerda, not to mention his recent vindictive and, for many, irrational execution of the royal almojarife Zag de Malea and subsequent persecution of the Jews in Castile. In fact, Cantiga 386, concerning a miracle that took place during the cortes of Seville convoked by the king at the same time of the miracle in Cantiga 376, remarks that no one dared to ignore the king’s call to assemble for fear of his wrath: “non ouv’ y quen non vêesse / por non caer en sa sanna” (v. 18). Alfonso X most probably acquired the j­asper ring for the same reason he gave it to his brother, to combat chronic depression. In light of his recent bout with a cancerous affliction that nearly caused him to lose an eye,227 he may also have seen in the jasper a remedy for that particular affliction, since the stone “strengthens one’s sight and uplifts one’s spirits.”

238

Dawn of a Dynasty

In the meantime, Infante Manuel found it difficult to avoid his seigniorial responsibilities in Murcia, where he was obliged to remain in constant contact with his brother-in-law Pedro III, who on 28 N ­ ovember wrote from Alzira in the kingdom of Valencia to the infante’s a­ delantado, Sancho Íñiguez, thanking him for sending on with Martín Pérez de Fraga a gift of two hunting dogs and proposing the election of three individuals who would be charged with establishing the boundaries between Ayora and Almansa to address the frequent disputes that had arisen between the two neighbouring municipalities.228 A week later, on 6 December, Pedro III communicated once again with Sancho Íñiguez referencing a curious incident that invites our scrutiny: To his esteemed Sancho Íñiguez, Infante Don Manuel’s adelantado, greetings and salutations. We learned that Feyshurat Elphaque Earisxet, a Saracen of ours from Cocentaina who wished to travel to Tunisia for the purpose of ransoming his children, was captured and detained in the ­seaport of said Don Manuel wherefore I beseech you to consider this ­matter in so far as you may be able to in order that he may resume his journey, if he wishes, or return to Cocentaina. And if there be any who may have a complaint in this matter, we will respond as justice demands. Given at Alzira on viii Ides December. B. Escorna wrote this.229

In this context, it is significant to note that the alcaide or g ­ overnor of ­ Cocentaina since 15 October 1276 had been Roger de ­ Lauria, brother-in-law of Infante Manuel’s persistent adversary in Biar, ­Conrado Lancia, cousin of Queen Constance. At precisely this same moment, ­Pedro III was actively involved in a plan to invade Tunisia, a stratagem meant to distract Charles of Anjou from the Aragonese ­monarch’s real intentions, an invasion of Sicily.230 Was the Saracen ­Pedro III refers to in the letter – one who would have been carrying on his person a considerable sum of money, at least enough to ransom his children – ­somehow implicated in the feigned offensive against T ­ unisia? The admiral of the Aragonese fleet in this undertaking was none other than Roger de L ­ auria, governor of Concentaina. In any case, the problems Infante Manuel was experiencing in the kingdom of M ­ urcia were no doubt the same ones that now convinced him of the practicality of leaving Murcia for Escalona, a decision whose timeliness and propriety would soon be confirmed by the refusal of Murcia to join him and his nephew in their forthcoming rebellion against the king. Infante Manuel’s adelantado, Sancho Íñiguez, may well have been a descendant of the lords of Vizcaya and the House of Haro, both of which can be traced back to Sancho Iñiguez, second son of the first



Problems of Succession: 1276–82

239

lord of Vizcaya, Iñigo López, in 1043.231 Flórez de Ocariz lists a number of notable figures from the thirteenth century with the surname Íñiguez, including Rodrigo Íñiguez, grand master of the Order of Santiago (1237–­42) and Lope Íñiguez, comendador mayor of the Order of Calatrava (c. 1250), also recalling a “Sancho Íñiguez de Urdaniz” who confirms a document in 1276.232 Garibay cites “Sancho Yñiguez de Vrdaniz” as one of some fifteen noblemen, Castilian sympathizers under the leadership of García Almoravid, alcaide de la frontera, and Gonzalo Ibáñez de Baztán, alférez de Navarra, who abandoned the Navarrería of Pamplona whose population was subsequently massacred there in September 1276 by troops under orders from the king of France, Philippe III.233 Shortly thereafter, many of these same Navarrese peers, now considered traitors in their own land, sought refuge in Aragón, where they pledged fealty to Pedro III.234 Was this Sancho Íñiguez, then, the same individual to whom Pedro III wrote in 1281, addressing him as Infante Manuel’s adelantado? If he was, he could not have remained in the position much beyond Infante Manuel’s support of Sancho’s rebellion in April 1282. In any case, when Pedro III writes to him again on 4 October 1283, he refers to him this time as “Sancio Eneco tenenti locum nobilis viri infantis dompni Emanueli,” Infante Don Manuel’s lugarteniente or deputy and not his adelantado.235 As the year 1281 came to a close in Seville, Infante Manuel confirmed a noteworthy carta de población or municipal charter establishing on 16 December the town of El Puerto de Santa María, where Alfonso X had created a naval base on the Gulf of Cádiz and constructed a church dedicated to the Virgin and the military Order of Santa María de ­España, also known as the Order of the Star.236 Remarkably, twenty-four of the more than four hundred cantigas the Wise King caused to be written during his lifetime form a cycle specifically devoted to his most cherished enterprise, among them the miracles we have just described in Cantigas 366, 376, and 382, lending further credence to the authenticity of the information they provide concerning Infante Manuel’s activities during the fall of this year.237 The staggering financial exactions that Alfonso X had imposed upon the delegates assembled for the cortes in Seville during the fall of 1281, demands that they were too afraid to refuse, were swiftly appealed to Infante Sancho, as we are told by the CAX: And they who felt themselves to be sorely aggrieved, did not dare to tell the king and went to speak with Infante Don Sancho, beseeching him to take pity on them for if they were to return to their lands with these demands they would be badly received and believed that all of them would

240

Dawn of a Dynasty

be greatly persecuted. And he well knew how many deaths and how many crimes and how many reprisals the king his father had been responsible for throughout the land and that all were displeased and they implored him to protect and defend them that he might side with them so that they would not continue to be deprived of their rights. (75.219)

Realizing that he now had substantial support from many sides, I­ nfante Sancho embarked on a plan of action, proposing to his father that he proceed to Córdoba where he could more easily reconnoitre the area adjacent to the kingdom of Granada, all the while assessing how he might best gather together those factions he would need to support his imminent revolt. In the meantime, Infante Manuel must also have departed from Seville, setting out with his retinue for Escalona where his wife, now four months pregnant, would prepare for the birth of their first child. The documentary evidence we possess seems to favour this assumption, because Manuel’s itinerary during the first seven months of 1282 continues to place him in close proximity to Infante Sancho as the rebel moved from Toledo to Valladolid to Burgos, constantly consulting with his uncle as he informs us in his correspondence. In fact, the monarch’s current irrational state of mind and infirm body had effectively alienated most of the members of his family, especially Queen Violante, whose name had ceased to appear in royal documents after 5 July 1281. Furthermore, whereas the king’s chancery had traditionally employed the conventional formula “nos don Alfonso, por la gracia de Dios, rey de Castiella ... en uno con la reyna donna Yolant,” as of 16 December 1281 this customary phrase had now been substituted by the expression “nos don Alfonso, fijo del muy noble rey don Ferrando e de la reyna donna Beatriz,” a clear indication that the royal marriage had all but ended.238 It is very likely, then, that sometime following the cortes during the fall, Queen Violante abandoned the court in Seville for her feudal domain of Valladolid, where she would await the arrival of her sons Sancho, Pedro, Juan, and Jaime who, together with their uncle Infante Manuel, would plot the overthrow of Alfonso X in the new year.

8 The Rebellion of 1282–84

Writing on 15 January 1282 from Valencia, Pedro III informed his brother-in-law Alfonso X that he was making preparations with the Italian Ghibelline factions, including Alfonso’s son-in-law the marquess of Montferrat, to take control of Sicily from his arch-rival, Charles of ­Anjou. Following the now well-established protocol reflecting his recognition of the ruling triumvirate in Castile, copies of the correspondence were also forwarded to infantes Sancho and Manuel.1 By 19 February, Sancho’s precipitous campaign to build his own rebellious faction was well underway, as we can see from an enthusiastic letter he despatched from Toledo to the town of Miranda de Ebro in which he fervently sets forth his multifaceted strategy to secure the backing of the various estates: In view of the many injuries you the people of the town of Miranda have received with regard to your rights and franchises and in your customs and many other things which you used to enjoy during the time of King Don Alfonso, my great grandfather, and of King Don Ferrando, my grandfather, I spoke with Infante Don Manuel, my uncle, and with my brothers Infante Don Pedro and Infante Don Juan and with the bishops and great lords and the masters of the orders of chivalry and with many other noblemen of Castile and León and with various good men of the town councils and found that if your rights and liberties were to be upheld it would be of service to God and to my father the king and of benefit to both me and you. I therefore promise you to beseech my father the king to authorize and confirm all of your rights and usages and customs and all privileges and all the franchises and liberties which you always enjoyed during the time of my great grandfather, King Don Alfonso, and my grandfather King Don Ferrando, I also promise you that if the king, my father, or any other man should go against you or against these things that are spoken of

242

Dawn of a Dynasty

in this charter, that I will come to your aid and will protect and defend you even against my father the king as well as against any men in this world who may wish to harm you or trespass against you in any of these things. And I swear by God and Saint Mary and by Castile and León that I will guard and protect you all the days of my life and will never go against this agreement.2

Since Sancho asserts he had conferred with Infante Manuel, we must assume that his uncle was with him either in the city or some fifty ­kilometres away at his newly acquired estate in Escalona in the province of Toledo.3 On the following day, the young rebel addressed a letter to the citizens of Toledo appealing to them with precisely the same terms and rhetorical arguments he had used with the citizens of Miranda the day before.4 Bolstering our assertion that Infante Manuel now accompanied his nephew in Toledo, Alfonso X wrote from Seville to the town council and bishop of Cartagena on 1 March demanding that tithes, first fruits of the harvest, and other rights be rendered appropriately to the church or he will send “Diag Sánchez de Bustamante, adelantado mayor in the kingdom of Murcia for my brother Infante Don Manuel or any other who may be there in his stead” to enforce the decree.5 Both Sancho and his uncle continued to collaborate closely on their recently devised stratagem to alienate the estates from their allegiance to the king, and to do so they would have to remain at a prudent distance from the royal court in Seville. Pursuant to this policy, Infante Sancho despatched a letter from Arévalo to the town council of Vitoria on 10 March essentially reciting the same promises he had made to Miranda de Ebro and Toledo the previous month, decisions all of which were taken following the established formula: “in consultation with infantes Don Manuel, Don Pedro, Don Juan, the bishops, great lords and masters of the military orders.”6 It would soon prove impossible for the two conspirators to maintain the wholesale, indiscriminate promises they continued to make to every estate without coming into conflict with competing interests. On 29 March, Infante Sancho was obliged to render a decision concerning a dispute between the town council of Badajoz and the military ­Order of Santiago, a ruling that he would make, as he had in the immediate past, “[i]n consultation with my uncle Infante Don Manuel, my ­brothers the infantes Don Pedro, Don Juan, and Don Jaime and with all the bishops, great lords and good men who were with me at that time.”7 In light of the decidedly negative reaction on the part of the citizens of B ­ adajoz, who soon thereafter sided with the king against Infante ­Sancho’s ­rebellion, the insurgents concluded that the time had now come to make a formal break with Alfonso X.



The Rebellion of 1282–84

243

By 13 April Infante Sancho, and presumably his uncle Infante M ­ anuel, had arrived in Valladolid where the young heir to the throne convoked an assembly of the great lords, prelates, and representatives of the town councils that the CAX mistakenly refers to as a cortes.8 In spite of its blatant partisanship favouring Sancho, the CAX does provide us with essential details of the meeting found nowhere else: And then he came to Valladolid where he found his mother, Queen ­Violante, who was awaiting him there. And she was greatly pleased by the dissent that he voiced against her husband King Don Alfonso. And following his arrival there, he was joined by all those of the land and the great lords who had been in exile. And they all agreed that Infante Don Sancho should be named king and that he should be invested with control of the realm ... and they agreed that all the fortresses should be handed over to him and that he should dispense justice and receive the revenues of the kingdom. And this judgement was rendered by King Don Alfonso’s brother, Infante Don Manuel.9

Once again, Infante Manuel had taken the initiative under trying circumstances, asserting himself as the voice of reason in the midst of political uncertainty. He had previously stood forth in 1267 to support his brother’s unpopular decision to concede the Algarve to young Don Dinis by confronting the fractious nobles who resented the king’s concession with a practical rationale for the royal decision. Later, during a meeting of the first estate with the sovereign in Toledo during ­January 1276, Infante Manuel had made his celebrated pronouncement in ­favour of Infante Sancho concerning the royal line of descent, and during the cortes of Burgos in May 1277 he lead the participants in petitioning the pope to release Alfonso X from his vows not to debase the currency. Now, during the precarious assemblage in Valladolid, Infante Manuel, the elder statesman of the royal household, returned to his time-tested role as a trustworthy diplomat and reliable policymaker, articulating the crucial justifications his nephew required to validate his questionable insurrection. Fortunately, Infante Manuel’s precise words have come down to us from an account written scarcely sixty years after his address to the assembly of Valladolid, preserved in the Crónica Geral de Espanha de 1344 by Pedro Alfonso de Portugal, illegitimate son of King Dinis and third conde de Barcelos (1287–1354): In as much as King Don Alfonso murdered his brother Don Fadrique and Don Simón Ruiz de los Cameros and many other noblemen unlawfully and inappropriately, let him have no justice. And because he disinherited

244

Dawn of a Dynasty

the noblemen of Castile and León and the citizens and the town councils, let them deny him entrance to their towns and fortresses and let them disinherit him. And because he deprived the noblemen of their rights and privileges, let them disavow his charters and renounce his jurisdiction. And because he imposed excessive taxes upon the land and debased the currency, let them refuse to pay him taxes or royal imposts or monedas foreras10 or martiniegas11 or any other obligations of the realm even though he may demand them.12

There is yet another contemporary document that references the 21 April summary judgment of Valladolid, an open letter signed on 22 April by, among others, bishops Fernando of Burgos and Juan of Palencia, protesting the manner in which Infante Sancho, his brothers, and Infante Manuel forcibly enjoined them under threat of death to be present at the deposition of Alfonso X.13 The sentence itself was, in any case, initially affirmed by a small ad hoc group composed of ­Sancho and several nobles, knights, and citizens convened behind closed doors.14 As soon as the doors were opened and before the sentence was made p ­ ublic, the prelates asserted they had departed and were not ­involved in the ­matter.15 The sentence of deposition, then, had taken place ­privately and was only later proclaimed by Infante Manuel who, as the CAX ­informs us, was well compensated for his later spirited p ­ ublic defence of the rebellion proclaimed before the entire assembly: And afterwards, Infante Don Sancho rewarded him with the inheritance of Chinchilla and Jorquera and Almansa and Aspe and Ves. And Infante Don Sancho granted royal charters to all those in the kingdom for whatever requests they desired to make of him. And he partitioned the rents of the kingdom with land grants among the princes and great lords, just as they used to have. And, in addition, he gave them those funds which were reserved for the king’s own maintenance, the rents received from the Jewish quarters, the tithes and taxes collected in Toledo and Talavera and Murcia and the taxes paid by the Moors, so that he retained nothing for himself in order that they might be satisfied.16

The CAX states that Infante Manuel was given “Chinchilla e Xorquera et Almaçán e Aspe e Beas”; “Almaçán” and “Beas” are c­ ertainly ­Almansa and Ves, located in fairly close proximity to ­Chinchilla and Jorquera in the province of Albacete, and Aspe is situated between Novelda and Elche in Alicante, all of which formed part of the i­nfante’s fairly contiguous domain in the kingdom of Murcia in the region known as the “Mancha de Montaragón.”17 Furthermore, by 1306, Ves, Villena, Sax,



The Rebellion of 1282–84

245

Almansa, Yecla, Jorquera, and Chinchilla had all been inherited by Juan Manuel and were fully established as municipalities within his feudal domain when they pledged fealty to him in that same year on the occasion of his marriage to Constance, daughter of Jaime II of Aragón.18 Infante Manuel’s colonists in Chinchilla were among the first to ­proclaim their allegiance to Sancho in April and to complain of royal reprisals against them scarcely a month later, when they petitioned the young rebel to intervene with his father and defend their rights. He answered expeditiously, promising to protect them as if they were his own body: Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Sancho, ... in view of the many offences which you, the town council of Chinchilla, have suffered against your rights and privileges, traditions and liberties, your franchises and customary usage, and many other things that you always enjoyed in the time of my grandfather, King Don Ferrando, conferred with my uncle, Infante Don Manuel and with my brothers Infante Don Pedro and Infante Don Juan, and with the bishops and masters of the military orders and with the nobles and many other knights of Castile and León and with a number of good men from the local councils, and found that if your rights and liberties were to be upheld that this would be to God’s service and that of my father the king and to your benefit.19

In the meantime, Infante Manuel’s wife Beatrice gave birth in Escalona to her only son, who, having been born on the fifth of May, the eve of the feast of St. John Before the Latin Gate, was baptized with the saint’s name, as Juan Manuel informs us in the Libro de las armas.20 His father was probably not present for the event since he was currently accompanying his nephew Sancho, who at that moment found himself in Cuéllar, where he despatched an order to the town council of Burgos on 19 May commanding them to proclaim throughout the city and bishopric a new set of standards governing the coinage currently in circulation: Know that my uncle, Infante Don Manuel, and my brothers, the infantes Pedro, Juan, and Jaime, and the great lords and masters of the military orders, the bishops and other prelates and representatives of the town councils and the knights of my domain, approached me in Valladolid and all in unison beseeched me to authorize the coinage of the burgaleses and the leoneses and the pepiones and the salamanqueses even as they used to have them in the days of King Don Alfonso my great grandfather and of King Don Fernando my grandfather.21

246

Dawn of a Dynasty

The young rebel and his entourage had left Valladolid a few days earlier and were now making their way south towards Toledo and ­Escalona, where they would arrive in early June. This itinerary would find them a week later in Buitrago, where Infante Sancho wrote to Diego Sánchez de Bustamante, Infante Manuel’s adelantado in the kingdom of Murcia, directing him to hand over royal documents concerning the municipal boundaries of the town of Orihuela.22 Around 4 June, Infante Manuel and his nephew were in Toledo, where the CAX reports on several important events that occurred in that city soon after their arrival: And when the cortes were adjourned he went to Toledo. And as soon as he arrived there, he married Infanta Doña María, daughter of Infante ­[Alfonso] de Molina. And he also married his sister, Infanta Doña V ­ iolante, to Don Diego, brother of Don Lope. And a son was born in Escalona to Infante Don Manuel and his wife, the countess of Savoy, and Infante Don Sancho went there to christen him and they named him Juan. And ­Infante Don Manuel asked Infante Don Sancho to give him Peñafiel and he ­bestowed it upon him with the conditions stipulated in the privilege.23

To understand the implications of the several marital links forged at this time, we must appreciate that María de Molina, daughter of ­Sancho’s great uncle Alfonso de Molina, was the infante’s second cousin, resulting in a marriage that, because of consanguinity and Sancho’s previous betrothal to Guillelma de Moncada when he was only eleven years old, was subsequently rejected by the church as an incestuous union.24 Coincidentally, María de Molina was the stepsister of Juana Alfonso de Molina, wife of Lope Díaz III de Haro, whose brother Diego López V de Haro now espoused Sancho’s youngest sister, Violante.25 Further strengthening the familial bonds between the Haros, Infante Sancho, and Infante Manuel, was the fact that during this same period Diego López de Salcedo, half-brother of Diego López III de Haro and brother of Mencía López de Haro, had a nephew, Gómez Fernández de Orozco, who was at the time a part of Infante Manuel’s household and soon after the birth of Juan Manuel became the boy’s ayo or guardian, a domestic feature we will shortly explore in greater detail.26 Infante Sancho would not formally bequeath Peñafiel to his uncle until a year later on 5 April 1283 in a charter we will also examine more fully below. In any case, the connections established between Infante Manuel, his nephew, and the Haro clan ever since Manuel’s impassioned plea to the 1277 cortes of Burgos in support of Sancho’s claim to the throne again underscore the essential role the young prince expected his uncle to play in



The Rebellion of 1282–84

247

the evolving hereditary crisis kindled seven years earlier with the death of Fernando de la Cerda. Alfonso X’s perpetual vacillation concerning the succession had alienated the Haros, who had always backed Infante Sancho, and they had in frustration finally abandoned the king and Castile. Now Sancho had invited them to return on his own terms, and they promptly embraced his expedient dynastic strategies. On 5 June Infante Sancho, in the face of growing reluctance on the part of the citizens of Burgos to mint the coinage he had commanded them to proclaim throughout the city and bishopric on 19 May – a pronouncement made with the advice and consent of “el Infante Don ­Manuel, mi tio,” among others – now issued a peremptory order for the good burghers to do so at once.27 Meanwhile, and no doubt due in large part to that area’s historical allegiance to Alfonso X, revenue streams in the kingdom of Murcia were becoming increasingly unreliable, forcing the young rebel to issue a decree demanding that landowners in his domain render their tithes to the church of Cartagena and obey the proclamations of the bishop.28 Under the circumstances, more robust and effective leadership in the region would soon require the physical presence of both Infante Sancho and his uncle in the southeast. By 2 July, Sancho had transferred his locus of operations to Córdoba, where the CAX informs us he was accompanied by his wife María de Molina, the grand masters of the military orders of Calatrava and ­Alcántara, the prior of the Hospitallers, many companies of knights, and all the great lords.29 In his solemn malediction of Sancho shortly thereafter, Alfonso X would add that also quartered there in Córdoba were the grand master of Santiago and the commander of the Knights Templar.30 In light of recent developments in the area, it seems most likely that Infante Manuel was also among those journeying south in his nephew’s retinue, since he would soon be travelling further east from there towards his own domain in Murcia. Meanwhile, the meeting in Valladolid during April had led to the formation of a number of hermandades, brotherhoods or associations created for the mutual protection of their members and to defend themselves against the arbitrary actions of the monarchy, because Alfonso X was retaliating against them wherever he could. On 10 July, the grand master of the Order of Calatrava established an hermandad with the city and bishopric of Segovia, alleging the many violent and illegal acts, damages, affronts, deaths, imprisonments, ruinous taxation without representation, and indignities perpetrated against God, morality, and the law and to the great detriment of Castile, Toledo, León, Galicia, Seville, Córdoba, Murcia, Jaén and the Algarve up

248

Dawn of a Dynasty

until the advent of our Lord Infante Don Sancho ... And considering that it was a matter of great grief for him personally and the perdition of all the land, in agreement with his uncle Infante Don Manuel and his brothers the infantes Don Pedro, Don Juan, and Don Jaime, and with Don Lope, lord of Vizcaya, and with other great lords and prelates and the masters of the military orders and with the knights and good men of the cities and realms, he considered it to be beneficial and commanded that we should all unite and be of one heart and one mind, he with us and we with him.31

In this instance, the Order of Calatrava had effectively recognized the latest confraternity comprised of Infante Sancho, Infante Manuel, and Lope Díaz de Haro as the hegemonic leaders in Castile. That very same day, the grand master of the Order of Santiago, Pedro Núñez, signed a similar document creating yet another hermandad between his ­organization and the town council of Segovia with nearly the very same ­language acknowledging the indispensable support and backing given by Infante Manuel.32 Alfonso X, fully apprised of the scope of the uprising in ­Valladolid, was now exacting reprisals against individuals in the kingdom of ­Murcia who had transferred their allegiance to Infante Sancho. On 11 July, the beleaguered monarch issued a decree to the town council of Murcia o ­ rdering them to confiscate a group of houses belonging to Aben ­Hamete because he had “gone over to Don Sancho.”33 Two days later, fiercely pursuing a policy of swift retribution, Alfonso X seized the town and castle of Montemolín from the Order of Santiago, handing them over to the town council of Seville while accusing Pedro Núñez and the brothers of the Order of “inciting those of our lineage to overthrow us.”34 It would seem, then, that the monarch, unable or unwilling to accept the fact that his brother and sons had betrayed him, preferred to believe they had somehow been seduced by the perfidious grand master and his minions. This might explain the curious incongruity of why the first person to confirm the document is none other than “El Infante Don Manuel, hermano del rey e su mayordomo,” even though he had not returned to Seville since his departure from the royal court in January. His signature on the document is all the more perplexing when we consider that I­ nfante Manuel was a lay brother of the ­Order of ­Santiago and would have been exceedingly reluctant to endorse a decree that divested his own fraternity of such a valuable asset as Montemolín. Infante Manuel responded to these retaliatory confiscations by his brother in Murcia with seizures of his own. Ferrer i Mallol, without documentation, references several instances, including the appropriation of land in Callosa and houses in Murcia belonging to “María, wife



The Rebellion of 1282–84

249

of ­Guillem Guasch, the nursemaid to Alfonso de la Cerda who had received the property from Infante Fernando,” and another occasion when officials of Infante Manuel confiscated an inheritance and homes in Elche owned by “Pere Salvany, a resident of Alicante in the service of Alfonso X.”35 Be that as it may, the king of Castile and León was sufficiently distressed by the circumstances surrounding his deposition to resort to what previously would have been unthinkable: he appealed to his perennial adversary Abu Yusuf, the Marinid ruler of Morocco, to support him in his struggle against the insurgents. The contemporary Moroccan historian Ibn Abi Zar reports that Alfonso X sent a personal emissary to Marrakesh soon after the assembly in Valladolid and that the emir himself came to his rescue, disembarking in Algeciras between 1 July and 6 August with an army that the Castilian monarch financed by pledging his royal crown as collateral.36 With the city of Córdoba securely garrisoned by many of the knights and grand masters of the leading military orders, Infante Manuel must have felt sufficiently confident to leave the city for his dominion in Murcia, arriving in Villena by 12 August, where he issued two similar charters to the town of Chinchilla authorizing recent land grants made by his paritioners to Christian settlers there37 and reconfirming privileges and franchises made to these same new colonists.38 The CAX relates that by early September the combined forces of ­Alfonso X and Abu Yusuf had met in Écija, scarcely fifty kilometres from Córdoba, where they planned to launch an assault on Infante ­Sancho and the rebels defending the city. Sancho was in Mérida at that moment attempting to pacify the town of Badajoz, while Infante ­Manuel was either still in Villena or on his way back to Córdoba.39 ­Undertaking a forced march, Infante Sancho slipped into Córdoba under cover of darkness before his father and Abu Yusuf could surround the city, which they would subsequently besiege for three weeks without success.40 Unwilling to abandon such a costly campaign without some tangible evidence of victory and encountering no opposition, the Moroccan forces set about plundering the countryside and foraging as far north as Toledo and Madrid. Abu Yusuf returned to Algeciras in late November but did not immediately depart for Morocco as the CAX asserts, remaining there until March 1283, when he would again harry Christian forces in Andalusia.41 Several weeks later, on 8 November, Alfonso X issued a public statement of disinheritance and malediction against his contumacious offspring and, ironically, from this time forward Infante Sancho’s fortunes were visibly in decline.42 On that very same day, the monarch penned

250

Dawn of a Dynasty

the first version of his last will and testament, reiterating his son’s misdeeds and justifying his curse with meticulous historical detail.43 One of the most poignant passages in the document reflects the sovereign’s profound anguish at Infante Manuel’s desertion: And because he [Sancho] induced our other sons to commit these deeds, encouraging them with lies and treachery, provoking them to move cruelly against us and they, failing to recognize the love we had for them as a father, friend, and ruler, and the many benefits we provided them in raising them and arranging marriages for them and exalting them more so than any children of kings who would not inherit the kingdom were ever exalted in Spain. And likewise Don Manuel, our brother, whose affection was so deeply rooted in our heart that we considered him to be like a son we loved above all others, but believing that the first ones who ought to ignore Don Sancho and go against him, as they should have, we saw just the opposite of this, for it would have been sufficient for them to simply allow him to do what he did without attempting to help him, but they made every effort to induce other men to rise up against us, opposing us and rebelling against our sovereignty and all the other debts of gratitude which they owed us.44

At this point, if the rebel forces had previously condemned the ­ astilian monarch for allying himself with Abu Yusuf, Infante Sancho, C unencumbered by any moral scruples, decided to take the same route and on 3 December sealed a pact in Priego with Mohammed II, Nasrid ruler of Granada, who was then at odds with Abu Yusuf for usurping his rights in Málaga.45 In the absence of any documentary evidence specifying Infante ­Manuel’s whereabouts from August 1282 to February 1283, we must suppose that he would only have been able to return to Sancho and the insurgents in Córdoba after Alfonso X and Abu Yusuf had abandoned their siege of the city towards the end of September. On the other hand, it appears most probable that he would have already departed the southeast before the town council of Murcia declared its allegiance to Alfonso X on 8 January 1283. We may surmise, then, that Infante Manuel returned to Córdoba sometime in October or November, where he remained with his nephew’s entourage until early in the new year, when both of them set out for Castile and León. It had been difficult to hold the many diverse elements of the insurrection together from the very outset of the rebellion, and now there were increasing signs of dissension among the ranks of nobles and commoners alike. The physical presence of Sancho and Manuel in the north was urgently required if



The Rebellion of 1282–84

251

they were to have any expectation of maintaining a reasonable semblance of government. In fact, the year 1283 would not be propitious for either of them in this regard. The last document we have from Sancho’s hand in 1282 is dated Córdoba, 28 December, and it is certain that shortly thereafter he and Manuel had departed the city.46 The CAX reports that from Córdoba Infante Sancho proceeded to Medellín and from there to Talavera, though there appears to be no rational motive for this particular itinerary.47 The purpose of the detour, however, becomes clear if we posit that Infante Manuel was travelling with his nephew and was en route to his recently acquired estate of Escalona, only sixty kilometres from Talavera in the province of Toledo. Just as he had established residence in Escalona in February 1282, he now returned to his wife Beatrice and eight-month-old infant Juan, whom he had not seen since Sancho christened the child there in June of that year. This, then, may well be the fictional setting contemplated by Juan Manuel in the allegorical narrative of the Conde Lucanor, which the son has ostensibly drawn from his father’s fame as a falconer and his own memory of the incident, thus lending the tale a certain air of authenticity: Infante Don Manuel went out hunting one day near Escalona and cast off his saker falcon in pursuit of a heron, and as the falcon ascended toward the heron, an eagle attacked it. The saker, in fear of the eagle, abandoned the heron and flew away; and the eagle, seeing he could not take the saker, departed. And once the falcon saw the eagle had left, he resumed his pursuit of the heron and was about to kill it when the eagle returned. Again the falcon was forced to flee.48

This scenario was repeated a number of times until the falcon, in desperation, turned on the eagle and attacked it so violently that he broke its wing, and thus the falcon was able to kill the heron. The story, its antecedents, and its significance have been the object of several critical interpretations.49 On 8 January, Murcia and Seville co-signed a treaty of hermandad, affirming that “[i]n this way you assist us and we you against all men in the world who oppose our Lord the King and all who are in his service.”50 Greatly encouraged by this newfound support, Alfonso X was quick to acknowledge the endorsement with a series of edicts mandating the confiscation of land in the kingdom of Murcia belonging to the rebels, which he then bestowed upon the town council as a reward for their allegiance. The first seizure of property was promptly issued

252

Dawn of a Dynasty

in Seville on 13 January and was directed at Infante Manuel’s holdings in the albufera or lagoon known as Cabo de Palos, a region Juan ­Manuel refers to in the Libro de la caza as the “Cabeçuelos que dizen de don Manuel,” ceded to his father by Alfonso X in 1267.51 The s­ econd decree, issued the same day, appropriated the alcaria or “the farmstead known as Alcantariella, which belonged to the queen, including everything within its boundaries, all feudal holdings, all rights and all appurtenances,” and this would be the last time the monarch would ever mention the wife who forsook him.52 Coincidentally, the CAX informs us that the beleaguered sovereign even went so far as to offer his son ­Infante Pedro the entire kingdom of Murcia, where he would be crowned king. When Sancho learned of the proposal, however, he was able to negotiate with his brother, securing his loyalty with a pledge to grant him the income from the royal chancery and to enfeoff him with the municipality of Tordesillas.53 While Alfonso X was diligently seeking to build support in Murcia, Infante Manuel was just as eagerly countering the king’s concessions in the area with land grants and a renewal of rights and privileges previously dispensed to his colonists. On 28 February, the infante found himself with Sancho in Palencia, where he asked his nephew to despatch a charter to the town council of Villena reaffirming all the fueros he had earlier conceded to the town of Lorca on 13 November 1276.54 No doubt counselled by Infante Manuel to extend this largesse to the most important ecclesiastical and urban centres in the region immediately adjacent to his own domain in Murcia, from 1–6 March ­Sancho issued five bountiful privileges to the bishopric of Cartagena and three to the town council of Orihuela.55 In the meantime, on 4 March in ­Seville, Alfonso X bestowed on his daughter Beatrice, Queen Mother of Portugal, the city of Niebla with the towns of Mora, Serpa, Nodar, and Morón, in a document confirmed by, among others, Infante Jaime, proof positive that he had already abandoned Sancho’s rebellion and returned to his father’s authority.56 The same charter lists as signatories García Fernández, grand master of the Order of Alcántara, and Juan Fernández, provincial master of the Order of the Knights Templar, who six months earlier had fought on the side of the rebels against the king and Abu Yusuf in Córdoba. Soon thereafter, the CAX reports that Sancho and Manuel were apprised of a revolt involving many former adherents to their cause in Castile, members of the nobility including Fernán Pérez Ponce, the king’s cousin, and Alvar Núñez de Lara, who had also fought for Sancho during the siege of Córdoba. Realizing they could not defeat Sancho’s forces, they informed him they would leave the country if he would provide them with safe conduct to Portugal. Here the CAX recounts that “Infante Don Sancho requested his uncle



The Rebellion of 1282–84

253

Infante Don Manuel to accompany them and escort them safely as far as Portugal. And he did so. And once he had conducted them there, they followed the road through Portugal until they reached the court of King Alfonso in Seville.”57 The insurgency was beginning to unravel, and the king would press his advantage wherever he could. By the middle of March, Sancho and Manuel had moved on to B ­ urgos where, in early April, they received unexpected news in the form of a letter from Alfonso X addressed to Diego López de Salcedo requesting him to convey to Infante Sancho the king’s desire to meet with his son concerning a possible truce. While Alfonso’s missive has not survived, we do possess a memo dated 3 April that Infante Sancho must have despatched soon afterward to the town council of Burgos requesting their advice concerning an armistice with his father and directing them to accompany him to his stronghold in Córdoba.58 The royal overture was sufficiently compelling to send the young rebel to counsel with “la rreyna, mi madre, e con el infante Don Manuel, mio tio, e con mios hermanos, el infante Don Pedro e el infante Don Iohan e con los obispos e con los rricos omes que eran y comigo.” It was ultimately decided that it would be well to consider the possibility of an armistice, and Diego López de Salcedo was despatched to negotiate with the monarch in Seville. It must have been about this time that Infante Juan saw the writing on the wall, and began to seriously consider how he might return to his father’s good graces and the advantages this might bring him before he was obligated to do so by a treaty. While Sancho continued to battle the growing threat from Castilian royalists in the north, Abu Yusuf, who had been in Algeciras since the fall of 1282, now moved against Málaga in April 1283, attacking Córdoba in May. In June, Ibn Abi Zar comments that the plundering Marinid horde, foraging as far as a day’s journey from Toledo, finally retreated, but only because they were seriously hindered by the large number of Christian captives and amount of booty they had acquired.59 Given that Escalona was less than sixty kilometres from the marauding host of Morrocans in the province of Toledo, Infante Manuel could not but have reacted with alarm to the threat of an assault on his castle there and what that might imply for the safety of his family. He had been promised the castle and town of Peñafiel that lay some 250 kilometres to the north and 50 kilometres to the east of Valladolid, Infante Sancho’s stronghold, and perhaps at this point he might have given some thought to moving to that far more secure region of the country. On 5 April, Infante Sancho issued a charter effectively transferring the town and castle of Peñafiel to his uncle as a hereditary feudal domain (Fig. 35).60 During the month of May and fresh from forays in Málaga, Abu Yusuf’s forces assaulted the rebel fortress in Córdoba under the

254

Dawn of a Dynasty

command of Fernán Pérez Ponce, who was killed in the ensuing battle. ­Meanwhile, Infante Sancho and his uncle remained in Castile, where they ­attempted to pacify the royalists in the area of Ágreda and Soria. We have no documentary evidence concerning Infante Manuel during this period, though several letters despatched by his brother-in-law ­Pedro III are helpful in establishing the historical context of his activities. Since his victory over Charles of Anjou in Sicily and subsequent coronation in Palermo during August 1282, Pedro III had returned home to find a French army under Charles’s nephew, Philippe III, massed along the border of Navarre and poised to invade Aragón. Seeking to defuse a potentially disastrous situation, Pedro III and Charles arranged to meet each other in Bordeaux where the outcome of their differences would be decided by a duel, but the two arrived there at different times with each declaring victory over his absent opponent.61 By the beginning of June, Pedro III was in Logroño, a strategic position from which he could keep an eye on any possible incursion from Navarre while also reuniting with his nephew Infante Sancho, who had arrived in Logroño on 14 June pledging support for the ­Aragonese. A  week later, Pedro III was in Tarazona, roughly one hundred ­kilometres from Logroño, where he wrote to Infante Juan concerned that his nephew would seek to abandon Sancho’s cause and return to his father’s court in Seville: “We want you to know we understand you desire to travel to Portugal and from there to your father the king, and we are dismayed that at this time you would want to leave Don ­Sancho and ... we beseech you that once you have seen this message that you return to the border here where we are and meet with us.”62 The CAX informs us that at this particular juncture, Infante Juan “was creating a disturbance in the province of León where he thought he could bring the towns there under his control” (77.231). He had been given the town and castle of Valencia de León by Alfonso X in 1281 on the occasion of his marriage to Marguerite of Montferrat and had apparently taken his wife and family to live there following his abandonment of the king in Seville in the fall of 1282.63 Several months later, after his depredations in León had come to the attention of Infante Sancho, he would meet with his brother in Palencia, a matter we will take up below. In the meantime, the fact that Pedro III fails to mention Infante Manuel in his correspondence seems to suggest that Manuel had not accompanied Sancho to Soria and Logroño. I believe that on the heels of the Marinid invasion of Castile several months earlier, Manuel had made a conscious decision to reunite with his family in Escalona. By 5 July Pedro III had returned to Logroño, where he wrote the town council of Burgos in response to their letter concerning a proclamation



The Rebellion of 1282–84

255

of banishment Sancho had decreed against his aunt Infanta Berenguela, señora y mayora of the convent of Las Huelgas and Infante Manuel’s sister.64 Berenguela was well loved by the citizens of Burgos for her many benevolent endeavours, and the good burghers were incensed that she had been exiled for no discernable reason. Taking his ­nephew’s side, Pedro III advised the council that this was a family matter and instructed them not to intervene.65 There can be little doubt that ­Sancho had expelled his relative because of her unwavering loyalty to her older brother, Alfonso X, and Zurita reports that her influence in the city was so prominent that the young rebel feared she might be able to persuade the town council to abandon his cause.66 We have no ­indication of I­ nfante Manuel’s opinion in the matter, and it is possible that he ­opposed the decree or was at that point absent from Burgos, since Pedro III does not mention him either in his reply to the council or in a similar message sent to Sancho on that same day urging him to approach the problem with caution and to resolve it without alienating either the people or the church.67 On 15 July, Infante Sancho was in Toro with Infante Manuel, where he despatched instructions to the town council and judges of Z ­ amora ordering them, on the advice of “Don Manuel, mio tio,” his b ­ rothers, and others, to allow the Jews in his domain to collect debts owed to them so that they might be able to pay the royal taxes that were due.68 By 4 August Sancho had arrived in Valladolid, where the CAX r­ eports that he learned of Infante Juan’s escalating c­ ampaign to e­ xpand his domain in León. When Infante Sancho called him to account in Palencia, the duplicitous prince reassured him of his full support and loyalty but quickly gathered together his family and r­ etainers and set out for ­Alfonso’s court in Seville by way of P ­ ortugal.69 It is quite possible that during these same days, ­Infante Juan had been alerted to the forthcoming papal edict about to be issued by M ­ artin IV ­excommunicating all those who had risen up against ­Alfonso X and had calculated that this would be a propitious juncture to seek reconciliation with his father. On 9 August the pontiff published a formal condemnation specifically naming Infante ­Sancho and M ­ anuel for conspiring to overthrow the king and entirely ­disinherit him: “It is common knowledge that our dear son Sancho and other sons in Christ of the illustrious King Alfonso of Castile and León, together with his brother Manuel and the subjects of his realm, suddenly rose up against him and aspire to totally disinherit him.”70 By 1 ­September, Infante Juan had already returned to the royal court and on that same day, in a charter given by his father to the city of Seville, confirms as “fijo del rey e su alferez.”71

256

Dawn of a Dynasty

In the meantime, on 4 October in Zaragoza, Pedro III despatched a message to Infante Manuel’s adelantado in Murcia, Sancho Íñiguez, emphasizing the enduring mutual support the king of Aragón, Infante Sancho, and Manuel continued to provide each other throughout this critical period, acting, in effect, as a single political body in their attempts to secure and maintain the integrity of Castile, León, Aragón, and the southeastern sector of the Peninsula, especially against the growing threat posed by the Castilian royalists in league with French forces garrisoned in Pamplona: Dear Sancho Íñiguez, lieutenant for the noble Don Manuel. Greetings and salutations. Know that we send to the kingdom of Valencia our beloved knight Bernardo de Bellvis,72 lieutenant beyond the Júcar River for the noble Rodrigo Eximénez de Luna, our procurator in said kingdom, and we command that you and others of the land of Infante Don Manuel and Infante Don Sancho, our dear nephew, provide counsel, aid, and guidance on matters having to do with these same lands to whomever may be our designated representative and we especially and attentively request that you provide advice, aid, and guidance concerning our lands to the aforesaid Bernardo de Bellvis and we will be most grateful to you. Given in Zaragoza, the fourth day of October, 1283.73

In spite of their best efforts to remain united, however, Pedro III, his rebellious nephew, and his brother-in-law Infante Manuel realized the tide was turning against them and that they must act expeditiously to reach some form of compromise with Alfonso X in Seville. By the middle of October Infante Sancho was in Talavera, where he addressed an ­important communication to the council of canons of the Cathedral of León detailing earlier discussions he had had with Infante Manuel and others to devise a strategy to bring about a rapprochement with the king: I want to inform you that when I arrived in Burgos, I went there with Infante Don Manuel and Don Lope and Don Diego and Don Diego López de Salcedo and Don Juan Fernández de Limia and Don Pedro Alvarez and prelates and infanzones [members of the lesser nobility] and knights and many other good men of the kingdoms, and on the way here, they spoke about searching for a means to bring about love and understanding between me and my father the king and the other subjects of the land. I  considered it to be good and, in this regard, we agreed we should all meet together in Palencia on All Saints Day, the first of the coming month, to discuss how best to maintain both the king’s rights and my own.74



The Rebellion of 1282–84

257

The plan, in essence, would involve a cortes of sorts where the representatives of the cities and towns still loyal to the insurgents would determine the best solution for ending the current impasse. Several days later, underscoring the fragility of their coalition, ­Sancho and Manuel received news of the death of Infante Pedro, who had ­expired unexpectedly in Ledesma on 18 October.75 The CAX reports that Infante Sancho was pleased to learn of his brother’s demise ­because he was spreading lies and had planned to abandon the rebellion and return to the royal court in Seville.76 Infante Manuel would have taken advantage of the proximity of Talavera to his domain in Escalona, some sixty kilometres away, to visit his family there, travelling on to meet Infante Sancho and his retinue in Palencia the following month. The assembly in Palencia must have commenced sometime in early November, though we have no documentary evidence of Sancho’s presence in the city until the eighteenth of that month, when he issued a decree to the tax collectors of the bishopric of Osma exempting the monastery of La Vid from certain exactions.77 At this point, the CAX provides additional information that, in lieu of any other documentary evidence, must be taken at face value: And [Infante Sancho] left Segovia and came to Palencia where he met with his uncle Infante Don Manuel and Don Lope and Don Diego for the purpose of finding some way to achieve a compromise with his father King Don Alfonso if they were inclined to do so. And each of them assured him that they were in agreement with his objective. But although they told him they were pleased with the idea, they were not at all, rather they were troubled because they feared that any understanding with the king would be to their disadvantage. At that point, Infante Don Sancho decided that he would send a message to the king with a nephew of Don Diego López de Salcedo, Gómez Fernández de Vinnaqua, who was living at the time with Infante Don Manuel, to see if an agreement could be reached with Don Alfonso that would preserve Sancho’s authority and dominion and the lands and property of these good men.78

Gómez Ferrández de Vinnaqua’s relationship to Infante Manuel merits further scrutiny. He was the nephew of Diego López de Salcedo, son of Lope Díaz II de Haro (d. 1236) and Toda de Santa Gadea, and half-brother of Diego López III de Haro (d. 1254) and Doña Mencía, queen of Portugal, and thus a member of the Haro clan.79 In 1265, Diego López de Salcedo, at that time merino mayor of Vizcaya, was the leader of a Castilian expeditionary force that retook Cartagena during the rebellion of the Mudéjars, playing a significant role in re-establishing Infante

258

Dawn of a Dynasty

Manuel’s authority in Murcia and inaugurating a firm connection between the two families.80 In the González Jiménez edition of the CAX, his nephew is referred to as “Gómez Férrandez de Vinnaqua” (77.237); in the Cayetano Rosell edition he is known as “Gómez Fernández de Maqueda” (77.65); and in the Rodgers edition he is cited as “Gómez Fernández de Maquia” (fol. 60v). In 1295, when Sancho IV lay dying, Juan Manuel recounts that the king summoned him and his ayo, Gomez Fernández, to his bedside.81 This is the same Gómez Fernández Orozco chosen by Sancho IV to swear on behalf of young Juan Manuel as one of ten guarantors of the Treaty of Monteagudo signed with Jaime II of Aragon on 1 December 1291.82 Gómez is also identified as Juan Manuel’s ayo in several documents from the years 1296 and 1297.83 Zurita alludes to him in the context of a truce reached in Elche between Jaime II of Aragon and Juan Manuel in 129684 and mentions him again as a vassal of Juan Manuel during the Treaty of Ariza in June 1303.85 Salazar y Castro reports that he was the son of Fernán Ruiz de Orozco, lord of Hita, alcaide and governor of the  seigniory of Molina and a member of the house of Juan Manuel, prince of Villena.86 Benavides, citing the Crónica de Fernando IV, refers to him as “Gómez Fernández de Humaquía,”87 while S ­ alazar y Castro, in a separate work, alludes to him as “Gómez Fernández Dumaquía.”88 Gómez Fernández de Orozco was, then, a trusted retainer of Infante Manuel who appears here for the first time in a major role as the principle envoy of the insurgents to the court of Alfonso X. His mission in this regard must have been successful, since he would go on to serve not only Sancho IV but his wife María de Molina and cousin Juan Manuel in positions of increasing responsibility for the rest of his life. In fact, we may be sure that a passing reference by the CAX during this same period to an attempt by Alfonso X and Infante Sancho to involve Queen Beatrice of Portugal and María de Molina in a stratagem to reconcile father and son was most certainly facilitated by Gómez Fernández, who continued to actively pursue the embassy to which he had been assigned in November 1283.89 Following the assembly of Palencia during the month of N ­ ovember, Infante Manuel took leave of Sancho and set out for his newly acquired domain of Peñafiel, where on 4 December he issued a document ceding control of a house he had recently acquired from his nephew in Villacienzo to the nearby Hospital del Rey in Burgos.90 Over the years, Infante Manuel had maintained an ongoing relationship with the Hospital del Rey, which is not surprising given the close ties the hospital sustained with the nearby convent of Las Huelgas, where his sister Berenguela was señora y mayora. We encounter the first of these



The Rebellion of 1282–84

259

transactions as early as 3 November 1268 when Manuel contracted with Fray D ­ omingo, knight commander of the hospital, for the purchase of houses and farms in Belbimbre, Fuentedueña, and Sarasona for six ­hundred maravedís, property that was to be returned to the institution at the time of his death.91 In this context, it is noteworthy that Fray Domingo affirms he agreed to these conditions at the behest of Infante Manuel’s sister Doña Berenguela. More importantly, why was Don ­Manuel now returning to the Hospital del Rey a house in Villacienzo that he had only acquired from his nephew Sancho a few months earlier? The fateful answer would not be long in coming. A little more than two weeks after his donation to the Hospital del Rey, some unforeseen accident or illness had brought Infante Manuel to the brink of death, for on 20 December in the Franciscan Convent of Discalced Friars in Peñafiel he gathered around him on his deathbed ten witnesses and seven executors of his last will and testament, which he dictated to his notary, the treasurer of Murcia, Juan Pérez. The document, for one who was dying, is extensive and unusually detailed and given by a testator who was, in his own words, “con buena memora e con sana voluntat,” of sound memory and mind, if not body. It is, in fact, a fascinating catalogue of acquisitions made during his lifetime, observations on those with whom he had come in contact, and, to some extent, a veritable mirror of his own moral and ethical disposition with regard to family, friends, and retainers. It is a singular record that bears close scrutiny. The will was first published in 1981 by Torres Fontes, who transcribed it from a copy made in 1523 and preserved in the Archivo Municipal de Elche.92 Though the editor reports in his comments on the manuscript that it was composed five days before Infante Manuel’s death on 25 ­December 1283, the text he transcribes does not contain that information. In fact, a more accurate transcription of the document, taken from the Codex d’Elx, was edited and published in 1995 by Cabanes Catalá and is the text utilized here.93 In the name of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, amen. I, ­Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Fernando and Queen Doña Beatriz, being of sound mind and memory, make and order my testament in the following fashion: Firstly, I place the disposition of my body and the arrangement of my soul in the hands of my noble lord and nephew, Infante Don ­Sancho, and appoint as my executors my wife, the Countess Doña Beatrice, my ­notary, Juan Pérez, treasurer of Murcia, Fray Rodrigo de Burgos, father superior of the Franciscan convent of Peñafiel, my mayordomo, Johan Sánchez de Ayala, Martín Ferrández Pantoja, ayo of my son Don Juan, and

260

Dawn of a Dynasty

my knights Martín Alvarez de Ferrera, Alfonso García, and Juan Bretón. And I invest them with the power to oversee and maintain, with the advice and consent of Don Sancho, the estate of my wife and my son Don Juan in order that they may receive and have all the rents and rights pertaining to my domains as well as the lands and all else which I have from Don Sancho and let them have the power to preserve and distribute these things as set forth in this document.

The executors named in his will were all family and close friends. Juan Pérez, to whom he refers as his “tesorero de Murcia, mio notario,” was married to a daughter of Lorenzo Aben Hud, a Christian convert and scion of the reigning Muslim family in Murcia before the Christian conquest and occupation.94 His title indicates he was the treasurer of the Cathedral of Murcia in the diocese of Cartagena, and he must have continued to accompany and guide both Beatrice and his young master, Juan Manuel, as late as 1288, when he appears in a charter given by the infante’s son to the Franciscans of Peñafiel as “El tesorero de Murcia.”95 Martín Fernández Pantoja, whom Infante Manuel refers to as “ayo de mio fijo don Johan,” was a member of an old Mozarabic Christian family from Toledo who lived in the parish of Santa Trinidad next to the Chapel of San Juan del Arzobispo, according to a bill of sale dated October 1294.96 He must have died before 1295, when Juan Manuel reports in the Libro de las armas that his ayo is now “Gómez Fernández.” Martín Alvarez de Ferrera, a knight in Manuel’s service, to whom he refers as “mio cauallero,” became in time the adelantado de la tierra de don Johan, a title by which he is addressed in a royal chancery document given in Ciudad Rodrigo on 3 May 1292 by Sancho IV and addressed to both Martín Alvarez and Juan Sánchez, “adelantado en el Regno de Murcia, por Don Johan, fijo del Inf. Don Manuel.”97 Zurita mentions that he played a prominent role during the war with Aragón in April 1291 when Alfonso III, in an attempt to sue for peace with Castile, relayed his intentions to Sancho IV through Martín Alvarez.98 The names of both Martín Fernández Pantoja and Martín Alvarez de Ferrera are mistakenly given in the Cabanes Catalá transcription as “Miguel.” Alfonso García, brother of Alfonso X’s mayordomo, Juan García de ­Villamayor, was the son of the king’s own ayo, García Fernández de ­Villamayor. Juan García would later become the monarch’s mayordomo and participated in the conquest of Murcia, where he was given the ­tenancy of Alhama.99 Alfonso was Manuel’s life-long friend to whom he refers in his will as “mio caballero,” and was prominently rewarded in 1268 during the second partition of Murcia with four hundred tahúllas in Jacarilla.100 He is later described by Juan Manuel in the Libro de las armas



The Rebellion of 1282–84

261

as “a knight who raised me who was very elderly and who had himself been raised with my father and suckled by the same nursemaid.”101 Juan Bretón, to whom Infante Manuel also refers in his will as “mio caballero,” is found in royal accounts from 20 June 1294, when he was given three hundred maravedís for the months of February, March, and April.102 In August of that same year, he received from Sancho IV a house and land in Solobrar, which had earlier been willed by Infante Manuel’s wife Beatrice to Pedro Sánchez, Sancho IV’s royal notary.103 We may suspect that both Juan Bretón and Pedro Sánchez were in the employ of Juan Manuel and his mother until the latter’s death in 1290, at which time they would have become members of Sancho’s royal household. Juan Bretón must have been a person of some consequence. In October 1294, when Diego López V de Haro, brother of Lope Díaz III de Haro, whom Sancho IV murdered in 1288, attempted to invade ­Vizcaya from Navarre, Juan Bretón was named by the governor of Navarre to replace the merino of Estella, who had seditiously allied himself with Diego López.104 The same document that provides this information informs us that he also received the villages of Vellisca and Vellisquilla formerly held by Pedro Sánchez, who was given in compensation the rents of the town of Escamilla in Huete.105 Juan Bretón is later mentioned by Juan Manuel in a letter despatched to Jaime II in ­November 1297, complaining of certain breaches of the Capitulation of Elche signed in July 1296, where it appears that Juan Bretón was forced to cede land in Barajas, in the province of Ávila some fifty kilometres from Escalona, to Gómez Fernández, Juan Manuel’s ayo.106 In the same document, Bretón was apparently awarded certain hereditary holdings, water mills, and land in Murcia that Beatrice had earlier given to an unnamed religious house for the soul of Infante Manuel: “Otrossi sennor el heredamiento e los molinos e el real que la condesa dio en Elche por alma del infante Don Manuel su marido e por la suya que lo entregaron a Johan ­Breton e es contra las posturas.”107 Two years later, Jaime II writes to him as “our beloved Juan Breton,” requesting his assistance in arranging safe p ­ assage for Juan Manuel’s future bride and the king’s own cousin, ­Isabel de Mallorca.108 The text of the testament continues as follows: Firstly, I command that all debts which I truly owe and which may be established by documents, or any wrongs or offences which I may have committed, be paid entirely from my own holdings. I command that my wife, the countess, shall have the rents and privileges of Escalona and the villages within its boundaries. And in addition to this, let her be paid the rents and taxes due from Elche in the same amount she formerly received

262

Dawn of a Dynasty

from Elda and Novelda and if the income from Elche does not compensate for this, let her receive the rest from my other holdings, and let her enjoy this income for the rest of her life, and if for any reason she may want more than the four thousand marks of silver that I gave her as a dowry and the one thousand seven hundred pounds Tours109 which she loaned me when I married her, let her be paid from my holdings and let her leave these holdings to my son Don Juan, and until these marks and pounds may have been paid to her, whatever amounts she receives from Escalona and Elche shall not be counted toward that debt.

Infante Manuel scrupulously records the amounts owed to his wife, both for her dowry and for the money she had advanced him before their wedding to pay for expenses incurred in this regard that he had not anticipated when he undertook to accompany his brother King ­Alfonso X on their 1275 journey to meet Pope Gregory X in Beaucaire. The ­constant reaffirmation throughout the will that all monies and property not previously accounted for be given to his son Don Juan to the exclusion of all others would not be lost on the man who would later attribute his considerable fame and fortune to this early paternal preference. But Juan Manuel had an older sister, Violante, or Yolante as she is referred to in the will. She was probably born in 1265 and most likely lived with Infante Manuel’s family in Escalona. At her father’s death in 1283, she inherited Elda and Novelda. In 1287, she would marry ­Infante ­Alfonso of Portugal, son of Infante Manuel’s niece Beatrice and the younger brother of King Dinis.110 She was reported to have been murdered by her husband, and her death in 1306 is recorded in several letters exchanged between Jaime II of Aragón, Juan Manuel, and King Dinis.111 I command that my daughter with Infanta Constanza, Yolante, receive Elda and Novelda with all their rents and with all their privileges and with all their appurtenances and with their castles by right of inheritance forever, and in so doing I give them to her in such a way that her descendants may also inherit these places except that they shall never derive from this legacy the power to go against my son Don Juan, my principal heir, nor against any of his descendants who may inherit the Seigneury of Elche or of Villena or of any of the other places which I hold in the kingdom of Murcia. And they may not give nor sell nor alienate Elda and Novelda with their castles to any religious order nor any clergyman nor to any other who may reside outside of the lordship of the kingdoms of Castile and Murcia, nor to any man who may be more powerful than my son, Don Juan, or any of his descendants who may inherit my lands in Murcia. And if by chance my daughter Doña Yolante and her descendants who inherit



The Rebellion of 1282–84

263

these places may wish to sell them, they are enjoined from so doing except to my son Don Juan and his descendants who may wish to purchase them, paying the median price for them. And let any legal appeals that may arise in these places be adjudicated in Elche just as they are today and let the administration of justice in these places be invested in my son Don Juan and his descendants and let them make war or peace when it may be required of them. And let Doña Yolante and her descendants who may inherit these places pledge fealty and homage for their security to Don Sancho and those of his descendants who may inherit the kingdoms of Castile and Murcia. And if Doña Yolante or her descendants may not wish to do so, I command that my son Don Juan and his descendants assume control of Elda and Novelda with its castles and that they return to my daughter Doña Yolante and her descendants the income from these places, except for the cost of maintenance of the castles in the amount of seven thousand maravedís of the blancos de la primera guerra.112 And if by chance Doña Yolante were to have no heirs, let these places revert to my son or to his heirs, and if he were to have no heirs, let all revert to the heirs of Doña Yolante. I likewise command that during her lifetime Doña Yolante may receive the martiniega113 of Peñafiel and the storehouse with its rights and privileges, but let the Discalced Friars there have the wheat harvest that I granted them together with the flour mills and let them have every week forever the carga114 that I authorized. And let Don Juan, my son, inherit the entire Seignury of Peñafiel, and the administration of justice with its penalties and its privileges. I declare my heir to be my son, Don Juan, who will inherit everything else that I own, including immovable property and possessions, and I authorize and give him this domain in its entirety.

Unlike Escalona, which, as an appanage, had been conditionally ceded to Infante Manuel in exchange for his surrender of the castles of the Valle de Ayora to Aragón in the treaties of Campillo and Ágreda two years earlier, Peñafiel had been transferred to him in perpetuity and was a hereditary domain. His wife, Beatrice, would enjoy the income from Escalona during her lifetime, but at her death the estate would revert to the crown. In this same context, Infante Manuel has re-emphasized that the centres of his two spheres of influence in Castile and Murcia will be Peñafiel and Elche, which Don Juan will inherit with the absolute right to administer justice in both places. I commend my body to be interred in Uclés together with my wife, Infanta Doña Constanza, and our son, Don Alfonso, and let our sepulchres be well and finely fashioned. I command that my body be given to the Order of Santiago together with fifty thousand maravedís and that the executors of

264

Dawn of a Dynasty

my will, with the master and the prior of Uclés, take from this amount twenty thousand maravedís for the construction of a main chapel or chancel where our bodies shall be interred and let them not be moved from this place. Furthermore, let them take from this amount ten thousand maravedís for the purchase of a hereditary property within the boundaries of Uclés, the income from which will be used to pay for six chaplains who will forever say mass for our souls and those of our descendants. And of the remaining twenty thousand maravedís, let them be used to buy a hereditary property for the Order and let the convent of Uclés, the clerics, and others celebrate a mass for us every year on the day of St. James and let them receive on that day a pittance of one hundred and fifty maravedís and let them always receive the income from the hereditary property that was purchased with these twenty thousand maravedís.

The original commitment made by Infante Manuel and his wife Constanza to the Order of Santiago in Uclés on 8 January 1261 stipulated that they offered their bodies and souls to the Order and became confreyres e familiares, electing interment of their mortal remains and those of their descendants forever in Uclés while donating 25,000 maravedís, of which 2,000 maravedís were payable immediately, for the construction of a chapel and four chaplains who would say mass for their souls in perpetuity, with the remaining 23,000 maravedís to be paid upon their death.115 The difference in the original bequest and the amount of m ­ aravedís left to the Order of Santiago in Manuel’s testament is due in large part to the provision the infante makes therein that “these ­maravedís which I leave are the blancos de la primera guerra,” the first debased coinage minted by Alfonso X in 1265 to pay for the ruinous Mudéjar uprising of 1264, coins that contained but one-third the amount of silver of the burgalés currency that had circulated up until that time.116 Other factors to be considered in this context have to do with the number of chaplains, now increased from four to six, and the size of the sanctuary to be constructed to house the infante’s body and that of his wife and son Alfonso. The original contract with the Order was for a simple chapel, but the will now states that it is to be the capilla mayor or ­principal chapel of the monastery. The stipulations of the will must have been faithfully followed because in 1574, when Ambrosio Morales visited the monastery and copied many of its archival documents, the kalenda or calendar of Uclés recorded: “VII Kalend. Jan. Obiit bonae memoriae Infans Domnus Emmanuel.”117 While the original castle and church of Uclés underwent extensive reconstruction between 1529 and 1598 to create the monastery, Fr.  ­ Francisco Rades y Andrada wrote in 1572 that though Infante



The Rebellion of 1282–84

265

Manuel and his wife Constanza had elected to be buried in the convent of Uclés and to that end had committed to building and funding a chapel, “it does not appear that the chapel was ever built and their bodies are entombed in the capilla mayor.”118 Over three hundred years later, José María Quadrado and Vicente de la Fuente discovered a document from the archives of the monastery of Uclés composed in 1598 that confirms Rades y Andrada’s observation and describes the capilla mayor as “a tower 25 feet wide with walls 8 to 11 feet thick. Near the high altar at the side of the evangelium is a flat sepulchre in an opening in the wall where Don Manuel, son of San Fernando, and Doña Constanza, ­daughter of King Don Jaime and Queen Violante, are interred”119 (Fig. 20). More recent studies by Ricardo del Arco y Garay tend to support the statements made by Rades, Quadrado, and de la Fuente.120 Nevertheless, the monastery has undergone so many modifications in the past three centuries that, although we may be fairly sure Infante Manuel was indeed buried there, the exact location of his remains cannot be currently ascertained. The assertion by Gómez Moreno that Infante Manuel was buried in the Real Monasterio de Las Huelgas de Burgos in a tomb mistakenly identified as belonging to ­Infante Pedro, Señor de los Cameros, son of Sancho IV and María de Molina, who died in 1319, is unsustainable.121 At this point, Infante Manuel turns in his last testament to four construction projects he had initiated with the Franciscan and Dominican brothers in the immediate past, assuring that each will be adequately underwritten with sufficient funds to complete the buildings: Likewise, I command that the refectory which I ordered to be built in Burgos in the Convent of the Discalced Friars be completed. I also command that the infirmary to be built in the Convent of the Discalced Friars in Peñafiel be undertaken immediately. I also command that the house I have begun to build in Murcia for the preachers be finished and that they also be given two thousand maravedís to pray for my soul. I also command that the Discalced Friars be given three thousand maravedís for the church I had built for them in Murcia.

To these charitable works we must add Infante Manuel’s June 1270 donation of the Moorish baths located at the Calahorra gate in Elche together with the Moorish cemetery on the road to Alicante ceded to the Mercedarian Friars of Saint Eulalia for the purpose of erecting a convent hospital.122 The baths, known as the baños árabes, are still to be found in the basement of what is today the Mercedarian Convent of Santa Lucía in Elche.

266

Dawn of a Dynasty

At this point, Infante Manuel specifies in his will the inheritance he will leave to each of his illegitimate children: I leave to my son, Fernando Manuel, ten thousand maravedís. I leave to my son, Enrique, ten thousand maravedís, and to my daughter, Blanca, for her marriage, ten thousand maravedís, and to my son, Sancho, five thousand maravedís.

From the fact that the three older children received significantly larger amounts than Sancho, we may deduce that he was probably not more than two or three years old and, given the high infant mortality rate during this time, may not have been expected to live long enough to spend his inheritance. On the other hand, Blanca had not yet married, suggesting she was less than fourteen years of age. Concerning the first three of these four illegitimate children, we have little if any documentary evidence to ascertain their role in contemporary affairs. Mondéjar confused Enrique and Sancho with two of Juan ­Manuel’s bastard sons and was unaware of the existence of Fernando and Blanca.123 Argote de Molina, whom Mondéjar cites as a reference, does not mention the four in his highly detailed genealogy of Manuel’s ancestors.124 Even the usually irreproachable Torres Fontes appears to have followed ­Mondéjar and other unidentified sources when he published an article on the descendants of Infante Manuel without citing a single bibliographical reference to support his genealogical tables and historical narrative.125 Nevertheless, Rodríguez López cites a document recording a ­donation made in 1321 to the Hospital del Rey in Burgos by “Doña Blanca ­Manuel, hija del Infante D. Manuel,” who was at the time a nun in the Real Monasterio de las Huelgas.126 The one exception to the frustrating lack of information with regard to these illegitimate offspring is, ironically, Sancho, the youngest, who appears to have been born around the same time as his half-brother Juan Manuel. Giménez Soler cites an entry in an Aragonese account book from June 1303 that states: “Give to Don Sancho Manuel brother of the noble Don Juan Manuel in payment of the 2,000 sueldos that the king has assigned to be paid to him each year, 200 sueldos barceloneses from his coffers,” adding, “This bastard brother of Don Juan lived in Aragón and was supported by the king.”127 This information, then, leads us to suspect that Sancho Manuel’s mother may well have been a member of the court of Aragón during the reign of Pedro III. The two half-brothers were ostensibly close, and in 1324 Juan Manuel cites ­Sancho in his Chronicon, mentioning how “Sancius Emmanuel, germanus suus,” had helped him to lay the cornerstone of the Dominican



The Rebellion of 1282–84

267

church and convent in Peñafiel.128 In Discursos históricos de Murcia, ­Cascales asserts that Zurita, Anales, and Rades y Andrada, Chronica de las tres órdenes, mistakenly refer to Sancho as the son of Juan Manuel when he was, in fact, his brother, as Juan Manuel confirms in a letter to the town council of Murcia dated Cordóba, 30 November 1320, where he refers to Sancho as “mi hermano” the alcaide in charge of the alcázar or fortress of M ­ urcia.129 In 1340, Sancho was lieutenant to his nephew, Fernando Manuel, the adelantado de Murcia.130 Having dispensed with his illegitimate children, Infante Manuel now details the inheritance he will leave to his servants and retainers and other charitable projects: I leave the amount of ten thousand maravedís to be divided among my servants. I leave to Ferrant Pérez Enamorado and his wife, Doña María, the salt works which they have from me to be theirs for the rest of their lives, and let them have the property in Ceniziento according to the terms of the charter which they received from me and I also leave them two thousand maravedís.

The bequest to his servants is unusually generous and speaks to the moribund infante’s devotion to those who laboured in his household. Ferrán Pérez Enamorado was a vassal who had received extensive holdings from 1266 to 1270 during the third and fourth partitions of Murcia, where he is referred to as an absentee caballero mediano. He is recorded as having three tahúllas or one alfaba in Alguasta, one tahúlla in Beniçot, twelve tahúllas in Tiñosa, eight tahúllas in Neuba, and ten alfabas in ­Benicotota. Because his property was coterminous with the land holdings of Andrés Pérez, Alfonso X’s royal scribe, and Juan Pérez, treasurer of Murcia, we may assume that he belonged to the same ­family of royal retainers.131 His brother, Aznar Pérez, and children, Martín and Elvira, figure as landholders in Murcia during the reign of Sancho IV and Jaime II of Aragón, and Martín was later a vassal of Juan Manuel.132 The salt works mentioned here may refer to Infante Manuel’s holdings in the albufera or lagoon of Cabo de Palos, today known as the S ­ alinas de San Pedro del Pinatar, which were extensive and constituted the most important source of that mineral in the kingdom of Murcia.133 The reference, however, could also be to the salt works in Elche mentioned by Infante Manuel’s wife Beatrice a few months later on 8 February 1284, authorizing the town council and citizens of Elche to continue to exploit this resource.134 The town of Cenicientos belongs to the Comunidad de Villa y Tierra de Escalona and indicates that Enamorado and his wife were retainers of Infante Manuel when he lived in Escalona.135

268

Dawn of a Dynasty

The charter mentioned in the will that transferred the property to them in Cenicientos has not been discovered. Other bequests he wished to make are described as follows: I leave two thousand maravedís for the maintenance of the Cathedral of Saint Mary in Seville. I leave eight thousand maravedís to be distributed among the m ­ onasteries of the mendicant orders. I leave eight thousand maravedís to be allocated for the marriage of ­orphan girls and for distribution to the poor. I leave to the squires who formerly served me in Murcia eight hundred maravedís apiece and let them serve there for three months and let all of these maravedís that I leave be of the blancos de la primera guerra.

Infante Manuel’s legacy to the Church of Saint Mary is quite understandable given that his parents, Fernando III and Beatrice of Swabia, were interred there. His earlier charitable gifts to the mendicant orders have already been mentioned and underscore his preference for the newer, more dynamic religious organizations, including the Franciscans, Dominicans, Carmelites, and Augustinians, founded during the thirteenth century. The last few paragraphs of the will reaffirm the testator’s desire to have his son Juan Manuel inherit his land and titles and reassert his feudal obligations and those of his family to their liege lord, Infante Sancho: I approve and consent that my wife, the Countess, together with these ­executors shall have guardianship over my son Don Juan with all that I leave to him, that they may serve him and keep him in all things as though he were their own son and let them do so with the advice of Don Sancho. And I command that those who hold castles in my name shall answer for them to my son Don Juan with the advice and consent of his mother and of the executors and if any should wish to leave these castles, let them leave them in the hands of my wife and these executors for my son Don Juan, and if my wife and these executors demand the return of these castles from those who hold them, let them answer to my son Don Juan and let my wife, the countess, be empowered to implement this together with all of the executors, or some of them, and carrying it out in this fashion, let them satisfy those who hold castles in my name. And let my son Don Juan, with his mother and the executors, answer to our Lord Don Sancho whenever he so desires, either with the castles which I received from him or which he may receive from Don Sancho’s



The Rebellion of 1282–84

269

hand, and at his bidding, and let him serve Don Sancho with all the other castles which he has inherited from me, and let him make war and peace with them, and let him serve in person and with the castles and with everything he has received from me as a vassal serves his lord. And it is my wish and I command and authorize that of all the earthly goods which I leave, whether hereditary estates or personal property, and the domains and all that I have from Don Sancho, with the exception of that which I leave to the countess as specified above, shall remain exempt, so that none of my heirs nor any other person may take anything therefrom except to satisfy my debts and to carry out my instructions with the exception of the expenses which must be made for the maintenance of the castles and any repair work which may be necessary, and for wages to be paid to my vassals, and let them apply all the rest to the debts and directives I have given until such time as they shall have been satisfied. And I firmly forbid that any heir of mine shall be so bold as to go against my will or infringe this testament and may anyone who would do so suffer the wrath of God and my malediction and let him forfeit all that he would have inherited. As guardian and protector of my body and soul and estate, and of my wife, the countess, and my son Don Juan, his servant, whom he has agreed to raise and educate, I appoint my lord and nephew Don Sancho and mercifully beseech and implore him for the service and assistance I rendered him with all my might in establishing his birthright, especially after the death of his brother, Don Fernando, when I argued that all of us who are citizens of his father’s kingdoms should recognize and acknowledge him as heir to the throne and as our natural liege lord whom we should support, and for the many other times I assisted him and provided support, and for the great faith I have always had in him, and for the land and all that which I have received from him, let him bestow and confer these things upon his servant, my son Don Juan, so that he may have vassals and the domains which I have had with which to serve him well and so that my soul may be free from debt and that he may carry out and accomplish all of this even as we have stated above in this testament. This is my last will and testament and if other testaments of mine should appear, I revoke them and desire that this shall be the only valid one and I confirm and acknowledge this. And so that this may be certain and without doubt, I have commanded this testament to be sealed with my seal and I beseech those named here to be my witnesses and to place upon this testament their seals in testimony: the abbot of Sant Gerin placed his seal thereupon; and the Convent of Discalced Friars of Peñafiel placed their seal thereupon; Diego López de Mendoza placed his seal thereupon; S ­ ancho Sánchez de Mazuolo, Alfonso Rodríguez Tello, Alvar Díaz

270

Dawn of a Dynasty

de Ferrera, G[ómez] Fernández, Ferrando Ruys Damaza, S ­ ancho Ruiz de Monesteruele, Nicolás Pérez, Ximen López. This testament was written in Peñafiel on the twentieth day of December, in the Era of one thousand and three hundred and twenty-one years [1283].

Of the ten witnesses who confirm Infante Manuel’s will, nine can be either tentatively or positively identified. In the case of the abbot of San Gerin, given the few if any religious institutions dedicated to San ­Germán in medieval Iberia, it seems unlikely that the cleric referred to in Infante Manuel’s will was a Spaniard. On the other hand, the number of organizations devoted to Saint Germain in France are legion, including the famous houses of Saint-Germain des Prés in Paris and Saint-­ Germain d’Auxerre. The name is prominent in the area of Chalon where Beatrice lived with her first husband, Pierre, and in ­toponymics such as Saint-Germain-Du-Plain in Chalon-sur-Saône and Saint-­GermainLes-Belles in Limoges. If, however, the name of the ­abbot who confirmed Manuel’s testament was “Sant Gerin,” it would correspond to the ­toponymic “Saint-Gerin” in Haute-Savoie, in the area of Saint Jean d’Aulps, and perhaps to the great abbey there of Notre Dame d’Aulps whose second abbot was Saint Guérin, also known as Saint Gerin.136 This would lead us to suspect that the abbot was an envoy from Savoy who had come at this moment in time to deal with matters having to do with Contesson’s inheritance. As recently as 1281, Pedro III of Aragón and Beatrice’s nephews, the marquesses of Montferrat and Saluzzo, had attempted to partition the states of Savoy among themselves.137 Their attempts had come to naught, but in April 1282 the death of Beatrice’s and Count Philippe’s nephew Tomasino of Savoy once again encouraged the marquess of Montferrat to lay claim to the Savoyard heritage. Counterclaims were then made by Contesson’s cousin Beatrice, dauphine of Viennois and daughter of the late Peter II of Savoy, who feared her own legacy would be usurped by one of ­Tomasino’s heirs. By the spring of 1283, the dauphine had entered into an agreement with Rudolf of Habsburg, the recently elected emperor of the Romans, who now proceeded to invade the Pays de Vaud, provoking a storm of protest throughout Europe from heads of state who called upon him to withdraw.138 It is entirely conceivable that Count Philippe, now old and infirm, had reached out to his niece Contesson and her husband in an effort to achieve some sort of alliance with Castile. Alvar Díaz de Ferrera must have been a relative of Juan Manuel’s ayo, Martín Alvarez de Ferrera. Diego López de Mendoza is described by Zurita as a vassal of Lope Díaz de Haro, who met with Jaime I of Aragón in Estella during August 1254 while conspiring to overthrow Alfonso



The Rebellion of 1282–84

271

X and was thus a member of the Haro clan who were now supporting Infante Sancho’s rebellion.139 This genealogy is confirmed by Salazar, who states that Diego López was the son and heir of Iñigo López de ­Mendoza, one of the nobles who plotted with Infante Felipe, renouncing their fealty to Alfonso X and fleeing the kingdom for Granada in 1272.140 ­“Guillem Ferrandes” must be an erroneous reading of “Gómez Fernández,” Juan Manuel’s ayo or guardian, since Diego Martínez, ­ ­notary public in Huete for Infante Don Sancho, who copies the original document soon after I­nfante Manuel’s death, states unequivocally that the original was signed and sealed by “Gómez F ­ ernández.”141 The next witness, F ­ ernando Ruiz Damaza, is most probably the same Fernán Ruiz de Maza who co-signed the March 1248 document in which ­Infante ­Manuel confirms for the first time at age fourteen. He was a descendant of a noble Aragonese family from Huesca whose founder, Fortuño Maça, was distinguished with that surname following the B ­ attle of ­Alcoraz (1096) in which he fought for Pedro I with foot soldiers from Gascony armed with maças or maces. His immediate ancestor was probably ­Pedro Maça III, lord of San Garrén (d. 1244), who fought in the B ­ attle of Las Navas de Tolosa (1212), or his brother Blasco Maza II, lord of Borja (d. 1238).142 Both brothers figure prominently at the court of Jaime I and are frequently mentioned in the monarch’s personal chronicle.143 Sancho Ruiz de Monesteruele may be the Sancho Ruiz, squire of ­Pedro Núñez, grand master of the Order of Santiago. and close friend and colleague of Infante Manuel, who received land grants in Murcia during the fifth partition that took place there after 1270.144 Alfonso X had specifically blamed Pedro Núñez and the confrères of the Order for having turned his family members and the citizens of his realm against him. Sancho Ruiz, the maestre, and Infante Manuel were all three freyres milites of the Order fully committed to the monarch’s deposition.145 Sancho Sánchez de Mazuelo was formerly a vassal and staunch ally of Alfonso X and fought with him during the conquest of Murcia in 1243, where Zurita calls him “capitán de Castilla.”146 In the same year, in a donation of certain villages made by Infante Alfonso to the Order of Santiago, he confirms with his brother, Juan Alfonso, as alcaide or governor of the castle of Peñas de San Pedro in Albacete.147 He figures prominently in the partition of Seville in 1252.148 In December 1253, ­Alfonso X gave him several houses in the parish of San Pedro, Seville, and sixty aranzadas of olive groves in nearby Moyar.149 Five years later, when Alfonso X was in Monteagudo, Murcia, Sancho Sánchez asked him for permission to sell or freely dispose of the hereditary grants he had been given in Seville and the request was approved, leading us to suspect that he was by that time a permanent resident of Murcia.150

272

Dawn of a Dynasty

Nicolás Pérez, alcaide of Murcia and Alicante, was most likely a relative of Johan Pérez, treasurer of the Cathedral of Murcia and ­Infante Manuel’s notary. Torres Fontes has catalogued eight instances of ­individuals with similar names, four of whom he believes refer to the same person.151 On 14 November 1294, Sancho IV wrote to the Cathedral of Cartagena giving them permission to retain their summoner, who had been dismissed by “Nicolás Pérez del Val de Borrax, alcalle de ­Murcia.”152 On 21 February 1295, Sancho IV ceded the castle of Celda, located between Lorca and Caravaca, to Nicolás Pérez.153 In August of that same year, Zurita reports that Jaime II despatched a missive to Queen María de Molina dissolving the projected marriage between him and her daughter, Isabel, for lack of papal dispensation and returning the castles previously handed over to Aragón as surety, including the castle of Alicante with its alcaide, “Nicolás Pérez de Murcia.154 Finally, in the Crónica catalana, Ramon Muntaner describes the exploits of Nicolás Peris, alcaide of the castle of Alicante, who died valiantly in its defence during Jaime II’s invasion of Murcia in April 1296.155 Ximen Lops or López was an almocadén or captain of a company of foot soldiers who had been rewarded for his military service with significant holdings in the third and fourth partition of Murcia between 1266 and 1270, receiving twenty-five tahúllas coterminous with the holdings of “Iohan Pérez, homne de Don Manuel,” who received twenty-eight tahúllas. Both Ximen and Juan are described as “peones mayores de la quadriella de Casiellas,” or principal footsoldiers of the Casiellas squad who also possessed land in Benimongit and Sanctamera.156 A decade later, Ximen López had joined Juan Pérez as a vassal of Infante Manuel. The very same Juan Pérez composed the final paragraph of his master’s testament: I, Juan Pérez, treasurer of Murcia and notary of Infante Don Manuel, was present during all of the above and, by order of my lord the aforesaid Don Manuel, caused this testament to be written and have subscribed this testament with my own hand.

In spite of the ministrations diligently provided by his Jewish physicians, the two brothers Don Zag and Don Abram,157 Infante Manuel did not recover and died five days later on Christmas Day according to the testimony of his son Juan Manuel, who writes in the Libro de las armas: “and my father died in Peñafiel on Saturday, Christmas Day of the Era of one thousand three hundred and twenty-one [1283].”158 This affirmation is all the more credible since Christmas Day of 1283 did fall on a Saturday. According to the CAX, Infante Sancho was in Toro



The Rebellion of 1282–84

273

when he learned of his uncle’s death, though he was in Benavente four days later, all the while at some distance from Escalona and the family of the deceased.159 It would understandably have been a matter of some urgency for him to ascertain the details of his uncle’s will and any commitments he may have incurred as guardian of the Countess Beatrice and his young ward Juan Manuel, who had proceeded to Huete soon after Infante Manuel’s untimely demise, most probably to facilitate arrangements that she would be obliged to make to inter her husband in the nearby monastery of Uclés, seat of the O ­ rder of ­Santiago, and because proximity to knights of the ­Order would provide her with some sense of security during these trying times (Fig. 19). Sancho subsequently ordered his notary public in Huete, Diego Martínez, to procure and authenticate a copy of the will to be delivered to him as soon as possible, and these details are clearly set forth at the end of the copy he received, a duplicate of which is found only in the Codèx d’Elx: I, Diego Martínez, notary public in Huete for Infante Don Sancho, have seen the testament of our master Infante Don Manuel, executed in this same manner and sealed with the seal of said master, and of the abbot of Sant Gerin, and of the Convent of the Discalced Friars of Peñafiel and of Gómez Fernández, and I caused this copy to be written and placed thereon my signature in testimony thereof.

Martínez does not date his copy of the will, but we may assume it was executed soon after Infante Manuel’s death and certainly before the death of Alfonso X on 4 April, since Sancho is still referred to as “Infante Don Sancho.” The town council of Elche, motivated by the same sense of urgency that Sancho must have felt, lost no time in sending envoys to his widow Beatrice to ascertain the contents of their liege lord’s will. On 23 ­January, they despatched the following letter: Let all to whom these presents shall come, know that the town council of Elche, because of the death of our master Infante Don Manuel, may God rest his soul, whose death we greatly mourn, has unanimously agreed to determine to whom our master Don Manuel has assigned us, or whom he has left us as his heir and our liege lord, and in this context we have chosen our citizens Pero Martínez de Jovera and Pedro Ybáñez as our special envoys and procurators whom we have dispatched to ascertain the truth from as many sources as they may with regard to whom we will now receive as our master and pledge fealty to him with the town of Elche.160

274

Dawn of a Dynasty

On 8 February, Beatrice composed the following response to the town council’s letter: From us, the Countess Doña Beatriz, wife of Infante Don Manuel, and Don Juan, his son, to the town council of Elche ... Know that your envoys and procurators, Pedro Martínez de Jovera and Pedro Ybáñez, came to us in Huete on 31 January and gave us your letter ... and because your envoys were convinced of the truth of the matter, we showed them the last will and testament of our Lord Infante Don Manuel in which he leaves as his principal heir and as our master, me Don Juan, his son ... and they received me as their master and paid homage to me in your name for the town of Elche.161

Though the letter opens as though it were written by Beatrice, her voice abruptly gives way to that of her twenty-one-month-old son Juan, who now appears to assert himself as a full-fledged liege lord. Among a number of orders given in this document to the town council by their new master are several that contain interesting details meriting our attention. Juan Manuel commands that the town of Elche shall continue to enjoy full rights to his salt works even as they had “en tiempo del Infante Don Manuel,” negating the possibility that these were the same salt works promised earlier in the testament to Ferrán Pérez ­Enamorado. Furthermore, he orders that all those who have hereditary holdings in Elche be required to settle there with the exception of Juan Pérez, treasurer of Murcia, his knights Alfonso García and Juan Bretón, his tax collector Mosse Abensuyem, and his alstiquimos (Ar. al-kimiya), apothecaries or physicians, Don Zag and Don Abram “por mucho ­servicio que fizieron a nostro sennor Don Manuel.” This information allows us to speculate that in his final days, Infante Manuel was most probably under the care of the two Jewish doctors, who would in time become the fisicos of Sancho IV and Juan Manuel, as the latter relates both in the Libro de las armas162 and the Libro enfenido.163 Infante Manuel’s sojourn in this life had ended, but his influence on future generations had only just begun. His brother Alfonso X died four months later on 4 April 1284, leaving Infante Sancho as the only viable successor to the throne. Nevertheless, Sancho was destined to become bogged down in an ongoing struggle to maintain his royal ­authority in the face of a father’s disinheritance and the need to secure an elusive papal dispensation for an incestuous marriage to his cousin, María de Molina, that would continue to cast doubt upon the legitimacy of his own heir, Fernando IV, and his grandson, Alfonso XI, for years to come.164 At the same time, Sancho’s nephews, the dispossessed



The Rebellion of 1282–84

275

de la Cerda children, with the support of perennial adherents among the nobility, were unrelenting in their counterclaims to the throne of Castile-León. Meanwhile, Infante Manuel’s lineage was entirely free to flourish ­unencumbered. He was the legitimate son of Fernando III and B ­ eatrice of Swabia whose sole heir, Juan Manuel, their grandson, eventually married Blanca de la Cerda, daughter of Fernando II de la Cerda (1275– 1322), grandson of Alfonso X, affording the opportunity for a future resolution not only of the disinheritance of the infantes de la Cerda but of the various legal impediments that continued to beleaguer S ­ ancho’s descendants. Juan Manuel’s daughter with Blanca, Juana Manuel, subsequently married Enrique of Trastámara, who became Enrique II, king of Castile, when he murdered his half-brother Pedro I, Sancho IV’s great-grandson (Fig. 4). In 1379 the son of Enrique II and Juana Manuel, the great-grandson of Infante Manuel, ascended the throne of Castile as Juan I, effectively ending Sancho IV’s royal line, which, ironically, now gave way to the newly established royal lineage of his uncle, Infante Manuel. As the youngest child of Fernando III and Beatrice of Swabia, left with little or no inheritance from his father and with virtually no prospects of ever succeeding to the throne, Infante Manuel could not possibly have foreseen that he would in time become the progenitor of the longest-reigning royal family in the history of Spain whose descendants would rule for over three centuries, from 1379 to the death of Carlos II in 1700.

Epilogue

Many years ago, when I was first contemplating the need to place the life and times of Infante Manuel in proper perspective within the reign of his brother Alphonse the Wise, the major obstacle at that time seemed to be the very real lack of concrete historical evidence to fill the informational void surrounding this enigmatic figure, who appeared to have played an important though largely undefinable role during the reign of his older brother. Today, however, the major obstacle is not a dearth of evidence but a surfeit of facts and figures that attest to the dominant role he played in the government of Castile-León for over thirty years, one that very nearly points to him as the monarch’s alter ego. In fact, we may state with some assurance that Manuel was successful precisely because he was the polar opposite of his older sibling. Alfonso X was an idealistic leader, a creative genius, eminent scholar, and patron of the arts though often impetuous, unrealistic, and capricious. Manuel was perhaps the perfect complement to his brother. He was essentially the consummate bureaucrat, a talented and level-headed diplomat with a pragmatic perspective and the ability to put into practice the grandiose and often unrealistic schemes of his brilliant, erratic, and more creative brother. Infante Manuel was not an intellectual or patron of the arts, not a lawmaker, historian, scientist, or musician, but a materialistic, rational, disciplined, and well-organized administrator capable of effectively managing the everyday affairs of the realm as the king’s alférez, majordomo, and closest advisor, maintaining a reliable sense of equilibrium and balance at court that often seemed to elude the temperamental and impulsive sovereign. Where Alfonso was generous, trusting, often ingenuous and loyal to a fault, Manuel was acquisitive, practical, and prudent, a keen student of realpolitik, often dispassionate, shrewd, and calculating, inherently cautious, and invariably discreet. Unfortunately, however, Alfonso’s excesses far too often exceeded Manuel’s ability to contain or moderate

278

Dawn of a Dynasty

them, and when the king became increasingly incapacitated by a series of acute ailments, Manuel ultimately realized he could no longer control his brother’s erratic behaviour and that the prudent course at this crucial juncture could only be an alliance with his nephew Infante Sancho to preserve the fiscal solvency and political integrity of the kingdom. Our task at this point is to place all of the evidence into proper perspective while arriving at several key conclusions with regard to the influence Infante Manuel exercised over his brother and generations of Castilian monarchs over the next three hundred years. Born in Carrión de los Condes in 1234, the youngest of seven surviving children of Fernando III and Beatrice of Swabia, Infante ­Manuel was raised in Pampliega and Villalmuño by his ayo Pedro López de ­Ayala, a scion of the House of Haro, the most distinguished noble ­family of Vizcaya and intimately related to the royal house of Castile. Infante Manuel’s closest childhood companion was Alfonso García, the son of García Fernández, Queen Mother Berenguela’s majordomo and a descendant of the Guzmán family, whose eldest son, Juan García, was raised with Manuel’s older brother, Infante Alfonso. Manuel’s lifelong connection to the Dominican Order and Santo Domingo de Guzmán, who was born in Burgos and educated in Palencia, was no doubt engendered at an early age by the family links to the Guzmáns, local legends, and widespread devotion to the saint in and around Pampliega where Infante Manuel grew up. Sometime during 1248, when Infante Manuel was fourteen, his ayo, Pedro López de Ayala, responding to a summons by Fernando III to assist in the conquest of Andalusia, brought his young ward to Seville where he became part of Crown Prince Alfonso’s mesnada or retinue. Up to that time, and until the death of Fernando III in 1252, the young man would receive neither land nor titles from his father. However, when Alfonso X ascended the throne, he quickly began to remedy this neglect, and for the next thirty years Infante Manuel gradually acquired extensive land grants and titles while becoming his older brother’s closest advisor and confidant. Sometime before March 1252, Queen Juana conveyed a significant number of landholdings to the Order of Calatrava, including the towns of Hellín, Isso, and Minateda that would later form part of Infante ­Manuel’s domain. Soon after he ascended the throne in August 1252, Alfonso decreed the division of the district of Alicante into the aldeas or villages of Novelda, Aspe el Viejo, Aspe el Nuevo, Monforte, Agost, Busot, and Aguas, of which Novelda and Aspe would in time be ceded to Infante Manuel. In October 1252, Alfonso transferred Alcantarilla in Murcia to the Order of Alcántara in exchange for Isso and Minateda, the



Epilogue 279

same possessions he would convey eight years later to Infante Manuel. In 1261, the king exchanged Cambullón, Gelves, and Torre de ­Alpechín with the Order of Alcántara for Infante Fadrique’s former holdings in Murcia: Alcantarilla, Almuztad, and the Molinos de Farquín in the Acequia de Daliof. Through numerous exchanges such as these, the sovereign typically enlarged his favourite brother’s demesne without the benefit of any formal decrees. There can be no doubt, then, that even at this early stage in Manuel’s ascendancy his brother was making plans to create a señorío or lordship for him in Murcia. Around 1253, Manuel came under the mentorship of the notary ­Gonzalo Domínguez, brother-in-law of the bishop of Segovia, Remondo de Losana. Don Gonzalo most likely provided the young prince with an effective background in administrative management. This association may be the origin of the mistaken assertion by Juan Manuel that his father was baptized by Bishop Remondo. In that same year, Alfonso X began to actively intervene in the escalating conflict between England and the Duchy of Gascony that Eleanor of England had brought as a dowry to her marriage with his great-grandfather, Alfonso VIII, in 1177; the king now envisioned that his support of the rebels might allow him to renew Castilian influence in the region, where the Gascon insurgents could be effective allies in his strategy to subjugate neighbouring Navarre. These territorial ambitions provoked a strong reaction from the English monarch, Henry III, who now sought a diplomatic solution in which his eldest son Edward, would marry Alfonso’s half-sister ­Leonor, while his fourteen-year-old daughter Beatrice, would marry ­Infante Manuel. There was, however, a stipulation that if Manuel were to marry Beatrice, Alfonso must first provide him with sufficient means to support Henry’s daughter in a manner befitting a princess. In spite of his brother’s efforts to improve his financial condition during the marriage negotiations, Manuel possessed neither sufficient land nor titles to sustain his claim as a suitor for the English princess. In the meantime, the death of Thibault I, king of Navarre, in 1253 offered Alfonso X the opportunity to resurrect Castilian claims of hegemony over a kingdom whose rulers had also been former vassals of his great-grandfather, Alfonso VIII, provoking a storm of protest from his father-in-law, Jaime I of Aragón, who now negotiated with the queen regent of Navarre, Marguerite of Bourbon, to marry his daughter Constanza to the young successor Thibault II, a union that would have been highly advantageous to Aragón. To oppose this threat, Alfonso and Infante Manuel allied with Al-Azraq, the Mudéjar leader of several rebellious factions in Valencia, a move specifically designed to undermine and destabilize Jaime’s influence and strengthen Alfonso’s ability

280

Dawn of a Dynasty

to threaten Aragón’s supporters in Navarre. Jaime I countered by joining forces with Diego López III de Haro, who was plotting with Infante Enrique to rise up against Alfonso X in Vizcaya. By the fall of 1255, Jaime I had promised his daughter Constanza to Infante Enrique if the young prince could successfully organize a revolt against his brother Alfonso and carve out a kingdom for himself in Andalusia. In October, when Enrique openly proclaimed his rebellion against Alfonso X and initiated a series of raids in Extremadura, ­Alfonso sent an army against him led by Nuño González de Lara and Infante Manuel, who met and defeated the insurgent in Lebrija. In order to avoid a full-scale war with Aragón, Alfonso now proposed a union between Jaime’s daughter Constanza and Infante Manuel to which the Aragonese monarch grudgingly acceded, even though he had planned to marry Constanza to either Thibault II or Infante Enrique. Manuel and Constanza were married in Calatayud in April 1256. During the ensuing negotiations, Jaime I must have given Constanza a dowry, and it is appealing to assume that the terms included properties along the disputed border of Aragón and Castile in Murcia and Valencia. There are, however, no records of any such arrangements, nor does Jaime ever speak of Constanza in any of the chancery documents issued during his reign. In fact, an official record referring to the marriage a year later explicitly excludes the kingdom of Murcia from the peace pact concluded in Soria. Jaime I had been forced by circumstances to wed his daughter to Infante Manuel, who would never be a king, and there had been no apparent long-term political advantages resulting from the marriage other than the immediate cessation of ­hostilities along the southern borders with Castile. At the same time, any expansion of Infante Manuel’s nascent dominions in Murcia would inevitably come at the expense of Aragonese interests in the same area, and this would constitute a source of lasting resentment towards his new son-in-law. The significance of Infante Manuel’s union with Constanza de Aragón cannot be underestimated. Alfonso X had married Violante in 1249 for precisely the same reasons and under similar circumstances: in order to bring about a cessation of hostilities between himself and Jaime I  centring on Castilian and Aragonese territorial claims along their common border in the southeast of the Peninsula. Manuel’s marriage to Constanza offered some degree of assurance that territorial differences in the area could be peacefully resolved while affording Manuel the opportunity to begin to build his own centre of influence in Murcia. It also provided yet another bond between the two royal brothers, who often seemed closer to the Aragonese nobility than to the



Epilogue 281

aristocracy of Castile-León. Manuel and Constanza subsequently had two children, Alfonso and Violante Manuel, who were born sometime between January 1261 and their mother’s death in the spring of 1266. Alfonso most likely came into this world in Seville around 1261. Violante was probably born in 1265, and in 1287 married Infante Alfonso of Portugal, younger brother of King Dinis. Shortly after the peace accord and Manuel’s marriage in Soria, ­Alfonso received an embassy from Pisa offering him the imperial crown of the Holy Roman Empire, kindling in the idealistic young monarch an obsessive quest that would eventually lead to his downfall. During the rest of the year, Manuel and Alfonso travelled extensively through the infante’s newly acquired territories in Murcia, identifying areas and issues of critical importance while determining the extent of ­Manuel’s responsibilities and the nature of the role he would play in the ­future development of this vital area. The sovereign’s primary concern at the moment was to place the newly created bishopric of ­Cartagena on a firm economic footing, and because the commercial viability of the entire region was dependent on its seaports and their volume of trade with other areas of the Mediterranean, he was committed to ­securing and enhancing the maritime facilities of Alicante, Santa Pola, and C ­ artagena with their inland populations of Elda, Elche, ­Orihuela, M ­ urcia, and Lorca. Of equal importance was the king’s dream of a future ­African crusade whose success might well depend upon the ­strategic utilization of these same seaports, and his ambitious new foreign policy would also require the imposition of new and more vigorous political and administrative structures. Manuel’s participation in all of these decisions is supported by his consistent confirmation of numerous charters during this period, especially an agreement signed in Cartagena in April in which Alfonso X cedes Aledo and Totana to the Order of Santiago in exchange for Elda, which he states he had already given to Infante Manuel, and it is most likely that Manuel also received neighbouring Elche. The ­Infante was determined to create a domain of his own that would parallel, both ­geographically and politically, the kingdom of Murcia held by his brother. Elche and its seaport of Santa Pola were situated directly ­between Elda and the port of Alicante to the north, and Murcia with the port of Cartagena to the south. Over the next twenty-five years, M ­ anuel would grant to the city of Elche those same privileges and charters ­Alfonso X had bestowed on Murcia, and it is clear that Elche became his most important holding in Murcia and unquestionably the nucleus of what was later referred to as the Tierra de Don Manuel. A year later in 1258, at the age of twenty-four, Infante Manuel was appointed the king’s alférez, the highest and most influential position

282

Dawn of a Dynasty

at court, while his milk brother, Alfonso García, was named adelantado mayor of the kingdom of Murcia, signifying a substantial modification of the administrative structure of Murcia. Infante Manuel never formally held the title of adelantado mayor de Murcia until after the death of I­ nfante Fernando de la Cerda in July 1275, and even then the responsibilities of that office were largely handled by his surrogate, Diego Sánchez de Bustamente, who acted in his stead until 1281 and, in N ­ ovember and December of that same year, by Manuel’s adelantado, Sancho Íñiguez. Manuel continued to occupy the post of alférez until July 1274 when he left for Beaucaire, at which time the position was taken up by Fernando de la Cerda, though Manuel resumed the post in July 1276 after his return to Castile following the death of Fernando in the summer of 1275. In 1259 Remondo de Losana, Manuel’s godfather, was appointed archbishop of Seville, replacing Infante Felipe who had resigned the position a year earlier to wed Christina of Norway. Don Remondo had recently christened the newborn Infante Sancho, thus forging an important link between Manuel and his young nephew that would grow ever stronger over time. Such was Manuel’s current standing at court that his brother now entrusted him with a crucial diplomatic mission to the pope in Anagni, where he would plead for the pontiff’s support of the king’s imperial ambitions, his desire to launch an African crusade, and the need for a dispensation allowing Alfonso’s illegitimate ­daughter Beatrice to marry Alfonso III of Portugal. While in Anagni, ­Infante ­Manuel also managed to procure for the Order of Santiago one of the most distinctive honours conferred by the pope, a permanent seat at the papal mensa, thus reinforcing his strategic relationship with Pelay Pérez Correa, master of the Order of Santiago and the most powerful military figure in Castile. The young diplomat’s undeniable success in pursuit of these multiple endeavours fully convinced the king of the wisdom of his decision to enhance his status at court as the monarch’s closest advisor and confidant. The following year Infante Manuel, as the king’s alférez, joined forces with Pelay Pérez Correa in the naval expedition against the port city of Salé in northwestern Morocco that had previously been granted to the Order of Santiago by Innocent IV. In 1261, when Manuel and his wife Constanza became confrères of the Order, Pelay Pérez transferred to him possession of the castle of Haro, a fortress on the border between Castile and Aragón considered critical to Castilian defences during the ongoing conflict between Alfonso X and Jaime I. During the next two years, it seems very likely that as the king’s alférez Infante Manuel participated in the siege of Niebla. It was also during this juncture that Alfonso was actively acquiring and redistributing the



Epilogue 283

former domains of Jeanne de Ponthieu and his brother Fadrique, and it is reasonable to assume that many of these possessions were subsequently bequeathed to the king’s alférez, whose performance at the papal Curia in Anagni a year earlier had exceeded all expectations. In October 1264, subsequent to the Mudéjar uprising in Seville and the southeast, Infante Manuel was an active participant in the liberation of Jerez and during the next two years played a key role in the pacification and reorganization of Murcia together with his father-in-law Jaime I, Alfonso García de Villamayor, and Pelay Pérez Correa. In December 1266, Alfonso issued a charter establishing the boundaries of the diocese of Cartagena in which we find, for the first time, a formal reference to “la tierra de Don Manuel,” a domain that now encompassed Elche, Crevillente, Aspe, Elda, Petrer, Sax, the Valle de Ayora, and Villena. The document states that the dominion of Infante Manuel was coterminous with the lands of Juan García de Villamayor, Alfonso’s majordomo ­until 1260, adelantado mayor de la mar, and brother of Alfonso García, the ­adelantado mayor of Murcia. In 1267, Infante Manuel met with his brother Alfonso X, Alfonso III of Portugal, and Prince Dinis in Badajoz and Seville, where he supported the king’s discharge of Portugal’s ancient feudal responsibility to ­Castile, a decision that brought him into direct conflict with Don Nuño González de Lara and Infante Felipe. While many historians have criticized Manuel’s assessment of the matter, we must consider that his son, Alfonso Manuel, was precisely the same age as his great-nephew, Don Dinis, and that he might have been actively promoting a closer relationship between the two young boys, contemplating the possible political benefits such a connection could mean for his son in the near future. These same familial bonds were strengthened years later in 1287 when Infante Manuel’s daughter Violante married Alfonso of Portugal, the younger brother of King Dinis. During this same year, Infante Manuel entered into a life tenancy agreement with Master Juan González and the Order of Calatrava, vesting in him all property and appurtenances held by the Order in Peñafiel. This covenant would effectively consolidate earlier grants he must have obtained in the same municipality from Alfonso X, creating in the process a prominent political and fiscal base of operations that would later be conveyed to his son Juan Manuel. For the next five years, Infante Manuel would spend much of his time in the kingdom of Murcia pursuing the same territorial goals he had previously realized in Castile. Documents promulgated by him in this period testify to his very real administrative talents to populate and enlarge his holdings in Murcia with both Christian and Mudéjar tenants while expanding agricultural

284

Dawn of a Dynasty

production with extensive irrigation projects, especially the construction of a large canal, the acequia de Don Manuel, to convey water from the Segura River to Elche. He was fully supported in these endeavours by Alfonso X, who persisted in his efforts to establish firm boundaries in the area in the face of intense commercial competition and frequent military forays into Castilian territory by the Aragonese in Valencia. When colonizing activities in Murcia were interrupted in 1272 by a late-summer invasion of the Marinids in Tarifa, Infante Manuel and his son Alfonso were charged by the king to contain the invaders in collaboration with Infante Fernando de la Cerda, who, at seventeen, was about the same age as Manuel’s son. Alfonso was distracted at that time by an impending rebellion of the nobles led by his brother Infante Felipe, and the urgent need to convoke cortes in Burgos to resolve the dispute, and so was unable to undertake the matter himself. Not only was the assembly that fall punctuated by diverse acts of disobedience and disrespect towards the monarch on the part of various representatives of the aristocracy and the church, but the monarch had simultaneously received news from Rome that Gregory X had rebuffed his petition to be crowned Holy Roman Emperor. Obsessed with his claims and the continual need to finance such a costly campaign, Alfonso X was inclined to submit to the demands of the disgruntled aristocrats, who were fully prepared to take advantage of his distress with the most extravagant demands. Thirteen years earlier, Infante Manuel had managed to persuade Alexander IV to support his brother’s candidacy, and now the beleaguered monarch would have to count on his diplomatic prowess once again. During the following year, Infante Manuel played a major role in defusing the rebellion; but his close ties to Pelay Pérez Correa, master of the Order of Santiago, and Juan González, master of the Order of Calatrava, both of whom were perceived by Alfonso X to have supported the rebels, may have compromised Manuel’s own standing with his brother at least temporarily, since he no longer played an active role in negotiating with the dissidents. This was a crucial juncture in the relationship between the king and Infante Manuel, and also marks the first time we have documented evidence of a progressive illness that gradually incapacitated the monarch. Determined to prevail in his quest to wear the imperial crown, ­Alfonso  X pinned his hopes on a final meeting with Gregory X in France, where the pontiff had recently presided over the Council of Lyon. Even though the pope had confirmed the election of Rudolf of Habsburg as emperor of Germany in 1274, Alfonso reasoned that any further ­delay in meeting with Gregory would permanently jeopardize his imperial aspirations. Hoping to dissuade the monarch from



Epilogue 285

journeying to France, Gregory wrote to Manuel requesting his assistance in discouraging his brother in a letter underscoring the pope’s very realistic concerns about Alfonso’s mental state and his own anxiety in the face of a looming ­confrontation with the delusional monarch. Much to his dismay, Infante Manuel responded not with obsequious compliance but a reasoned defence of Alfonso’s pretensions, rebuking Gregory for his failure to adequately recognize and honour the Castilian’s legitimate claims. ­Undeterred, Alfonso X set out with the royal family for ­Beaucaire, leaving his younger children and Queen Violante in ­Perpignan while he, Infante Manuel, and Alfonso Manuel proceeded to Montpellier, where the king became desperately ill. After convalescing for several weeks in the city, famed for its medical school and ­faculty, the king had sufficiently recovered by April to set out once again for Beaucaire. Alfonso’s quest for the imperial crown was ultimately a disastrous failure that nearly bankrupted the nation. The journey to Beaucaire with Infante Manuel was not only unsuccessful, but negotiations with the pontiff began in May 1275, precisely when the Marinids launched a new invasion of the peninsula. In his absence, the king had left the government of Castile in the hands of Infante Fernando de la Cerda, but the young heir to the throne died unexpectedly on his way south with an army to confront the invaders. Castilian forces commanded by Nuño González de Lara and Manuel’s brother-in-law, Sancho de Aragón, archbishop of Toledo, were subsequently defeated, and both Nuño and Sancho fell in battle. Unable to negotiate a satisfactory resolution of the matter of empire and suffering a nearly fatal recurrence of his affliction, the king, along with Infante Manuel and Alfonso Manuel, left Beaucaire in August, returning to Montpellier where the sovereign was once again attended by the same physicians who had treated him earlier that year. This time, however, Alfonso Manuel fell ill and died in Montpellier, leaving in jeopardy all of Manuel’s hopes and plans for the creation of a powerful and independent dynasty in southeastern Spain. Without a successor, his dominions were at risk of reverting to the crown at his death, and all he had worked for to that point would be lost. His ten-year-old daughter Violante was no substitute for a male heir, and the pressure on him to secure his legacy was overwhelming. Infante Manuel’s decision to link his fortunes with the House of ­Savoy was, however, neither precipitous nor coincidental, but rather the culmination of a series of historical events that joined the ­Savoyards with the ruling families of Aragón, Castile, England, and France. ­Manuel’s future wife was the youngest daughter of the count of ­Savoy, ­Amadeus IV; she was known as Beatrice Contesson to distinguish her

286

Dawn of a Dynasty

from her older half-sister and her aunt, both of whom were named ­Beatrice of Savoy. Contesson’s half-sister was the wife of Manfred Hohenstaufen, whose daughter Constance of Sicily would marry ­ ­Manuel’s ­brother-in-law Pedro III, the future king of Aragón. The ­Hohenstaufen connection was hardly new, having been established in 1209 when Emperor Frederick II married Constanza de Aragón, sister of Pedro II and the paternal aunt of Jaime I. The ­eldest daughter of Contesson’s aunt, ­Marguerite of Provence, became queen of France when she was wed to Louis IX in 1234. Two years later, her aunt’s ­second daughter, ­Eleanor of Provence, became queen of ­England when she married Henry III. In 1254, Henry and Eleanor’s son Edward espoused Infante Manuel’s half-sister Leonor, the daughter of Fernando III and his second wife, Jeanne de Ponthieu. That same year, Henry III also proposed a wedding between Infante Manuel and his fourteenyear-old daughter Beatrice, but this proposal came to naught when Manuel married Constanza de Aragón in 1256. Following the death of Constanza de Aragón ten years later, a­ nother attempt was undertaken to forge a Savoyard connection with the Castilian monarchy when Alfonso X arranged for Manuel and his son ­Alfonso to marry Constance and Guillelma, the daughters of Gaston VII de Montcada, viscount of Béarn, the nephew of Contesson’s aunt, Beatrice of Savoy. Constance de Béarn had previously married Alfonso de Aragón, son of Jaime I and his first wife Leonor of Castile, and was widowed at the infante’s death in 1260. Manuel’s marriage never took place for lack of papal dispensation because his first wife, Constanza, was the half-sister of Alfonso de Aragón, Constance de Béarn’s first husband. Guillelma de Béarn, Gaston’s fourth daughter and seven years old at the time, was later betrothed in 1270 to Infante Sancho, Infante Manuel’s nephew, but he refused to marry her, protesting that she was “fea y brava.” In 1271 Contesson’s nephew, William VII of Montferrat, the son of her older sister Marguerite of Savoy, married the daughter of Alfonso X and Infante Manuel’s niece, Beatrice. William’s daughter by a previous marriage, Marguerite of Montferrat, the granddaughter of Richard, earl of Cornwall, Alfonso’s imperial rival, wedded the king’s son Infante Juan a year later in 1272. In the meantime, Jaime I of Aragón sought to counteract Alfonso’s marital alliances with the houses of Montcada and Savoy by strengthening his own ties with these same families. Jaime I’s political strategy since 1256 had been dictated by the need to oppose his son-in-law’s imperial pretensions in both the Iberian Peninsula and the M ­ editerranean, and his first step in this context was a marriage proposal in 1260



Epilogue 287

between his son and heir, Pedro, and Constance, the twelve-year-old daughter of Beatrice of Savoy, Contesson’s half-sister, and Manfred ­Hohenstaufen, Alfonso’s rival in Italy for the crown of the Holy Roman Empire. In spite of Alfonso’s strenuous objections, the marriage took place two years later. In 1263, the Aragonese monarch attempted to forge yet another link in his strategy to contain Alfonso X by arranging a marriage between Contesson and his son Jaime de Mallorca. Contesson’s brother, Count Boniface, had died about this same time, and Jaime I may have surmised that even though she had renounced her claims to the S ­ avoyard domains, his son might somehow renew them. Contesson’s uncle, Peter II of Savoy, however, acted swiftly to usurp the title for himself, pre-empting any designs Jaime I may have had on the county of Savoy. By 1265, Charles of Anjou had raised an army in Lyon in preparation for his triumphant campaign against Manfred and Sicily, achieving a swift and crushing defeat of the Ghibelline forces a year later at the Battle of Benevento. Alarmed by these events, which posed a grave danger to his son Pedro and threatened to upset the balance of power in southeast France, the king of Aragón once again proposed a marriage between his son Jaime de Mallorca and Beatrice Contesson. This second marriage proposal was equally unproductive, and when Peter II of Savoy died in 1268, his successor, Count Philippe I, sought to strengthen his dynastic position with a marital alliance between Pierre de Chalon and his niece Beatrice Contesson. Pierre, like Infante Manuel, was a descendant of the emperor Frederick I Barbarossa, and his mother, Isabel of Courtenay, was directly related to Constanza de Aragón, Infante Manuel’s first wife. When Pierre died six years later, Count Philippe found himself in difficult circumstances, surrounded by powerful figures with political claims on the Savoyard territories. He was acutely aware that his young niece Contesson could easily represent a serious threat were she to marry someone who might reinstate her claims to the House of ­Savoy. In the fall of 1275, shortly after the death of Infante M ­ anuel’s son ­Alfonso, Count Philippe was simultaneously at war with King Alfonso’s rival, Rudolf of Habsburg, recently elected king of the ­ ­Romans, and threatened by his nephews William VII of M ­ ontferrat and Thomas I of Saluzzo, staunch allies of the king of Castile. He quickly realized that a marriage alliance with Alfonso would be advantageous in his current struggle with Rudolf and with his relatives William of ­Montferrat, Alfonso’s son-in-law, and Thomas of Saluzzo. The marriage between Infante Manuel and Contesson was arranged not only because of M ­ anuel’s need to produce a new heir but because it would provide a beneficial alliance with Alfonso X against Rudolf and Philippe’s

288

Dawn of a Dynasty

relatives. The wedding ceremony took place sometime in the second half of November, probably by proxy in Montpellier. Manuel and Beatrice returned with the king to Toledo in January 1276 and, under heavy pressure to name a successor, Alfonso X convoked cortes in Burgos from May to July, a legislative session in which Infante Manuel played a major role. The Crónica de Alfonso X records that during the ensuing assembly in Burgos, Infante Manuel set forth a carefully reasoned argument supporting the legality of Infante Sancho’s claim to the throne, effectively opposing the counterclaims of the Laras and those upholding the rights of the five-year-old son of the deceased Fernando de la Cerda. The fifteenth-century Cuarta crónica general, however, asserts that Infante Sancho demanded his case be heard by a plenary session of the cortes of Castile and León and that the judges and advocates selected to adjudicate the matter were Infante Don Manuel, Diego López de Salcedo, Juan Gato de Zamora, and Agustín Pérez. By the beginning of July, the cortes had approved Sancho’s candidacy and Alfonso proclaimed him his heir. The death of Jaime I in that same month now brought his son Pedro III to the throne of Aragón, marking the beginnings of a close relationship between Pedro, his nephew Sancho, and his brother-in-law Infante Manuel. Initially, however, the Aragonese was ill disposed towards both Manuel and Alfonso X, who had taken advantage of a recent Mudéjar uprising in Valencia to revive their former strategy of destabilizing the region by encouraging the Muslim inhabitants to rebel against their Catalan overlords while provoking incursions by Christian colonizers across the border in the kingdom of Valencia. In the meantime, the question of the Navarrese succession had engendered renewed hostilities in Navarre, France, and Aragón that quickly spread to neighbouring Castile, embroiling opposing factions on all sides: Philippe III of France threatened to invade Castile to protect the rights of his nephews the de la Cerda children, while many from the Haro clan, supporters of Infante Sancho, and the Laras, who had championed the candidacy of the de la Cerdas, now conspired against the king to such an extent that it seemed clear his reign was moving slowly and inexorably towards the brink of civil war. The physical toll on the beleaguered monarch was evident, and by September 1276 he had taken up residence in Vitoria where Cantiga 235 reports that he lay gravely ill. While all these momentous events were transpiring in the north, Infante Manuel was earnestly engaged in the business of improving the circumstances of Christian settlers in his domain in Murcia, including assigning water rights, constructing canals, and attracting new



Epilogue 289

colonists to lands regularly depleted by abandonment, rebellion, and war. By 1277, Villena had begun to eclipse Elche as the most important municipality in the Tierra de Don Manuel, which would later become known by its historical name, the Señorío or Lordship of Villena. During the winter of 1276–77, the king suffered an excruciating recurrence of his illness while Infante Manuel remained in Murcia. By May 1277, Alfonso had sufficiently recovered to convene the cortes in Burgos, whose business now revolved almost entirely around matters of taxation and revenue enhancement. The monarch’s mismanagement of the currency had resulted in an acute lack of coinage in circulation, and because he had previously promised not to debase the currency, Infante Manuel was recruited by a host of notables from among the church and the nobility to address an urgent letter to Pope John XXI entreating him to release the king from his vow. Sometime towards the end of June, Alfonso X issued orders to apprehend and execute Infante Fadrique and his son-in-law Simón Ruiz de los Cameros. At this juncture, Infante Manuel’s position in the hierarchy at court suddenly changed. Infante Sancho now confirms as the king’s majordomo, an office Infante Fernando had held from 1260 until his death in July 1275, while Infante Manuel confirms without any title whatsoever, and the office of the king’s alférez he previously held is now occupied by the king’s younger son Infante Juan, prompting several questions: Why had the office of alférez been conferred upon a thirteen-year-old boy, and why had Infante Pedro, his sixteen-year-old brother, been passed over for the post? Had the recent executions of Infante Fadrique and Simón Ruiz convinced the monarch that none of his brothers could be trusted? Enrique, Felipe, and Fadrique had betrayed him, and perhaps he felt Infante Manuel was destined to do the same. Infante Manuel remained in Burgos following the cortes, and did not participate in the defence of Seville that August when Abu Yusuf defeated the Castilian forces under the command of the king’s illegitimate son Alfonso Fernández el Niño. By November, the king was once again so gravely ill that he believed he would die, yet Infante Manuel remained steadfastly by his side and during that month was restored to his brother’s confidence, resuming the post of mayordomo mayor. However, the sovereign’s frequent bouts of illness and irrationality, together with his decision to name Infante Sancho as his heir, so greatly alarmed Queen Violante that she abandoned her husband, departing with her two de la Cerda grandchildren for the safety of her brother Pedro’s court. Accompanied by Infante Manuel, Alfonso X travelled to ­Valladolid where, in April, he was once again so ill that Cantiga 235 reports he nearly died but was resurrected by a miracle of the Virgin.

290

Dawn of a Dynasty

By the summer of 1278, Alfonso had sufficiently recovered to convoke cortes in Segovia, where he addressed the desperate need for funds to pursue a crusade against the Muslim invaders who had recently occupied Algeciras. At the same time, however, Alfonso X had determined that the threat now posed by the king of France and the rebellious Castilian nobles, who had sought refuge with the French ­monarch in both France and Navarre, outweighed the risks of the siege of Algeciras and that both Sancho and Manuel would be more profitably engaged in maintaining security in the north of the ­Peninsula. ­Lacking the necessary resources to support his own armed forces, Sancho requested financial assistance from Infante ­Manuel, bringing Sancho and Manuel into direct competition for funding with the king. Alfonso was also a­ nxious to negotiate the return of Queen Violante to Castile, but her brother, Pedro III, would not release her from custody until she had settled the substantial debts acquired during her prolonged stay in Aragón. Infante Manuel was subsequently despatched to Pedro’s court in January 1279 to arrange a settlement that would include the simultaneous release of the i­nfantes de la Cerda, who had been sent for safekeeping to the castle of Játiva, adjacent to the infante’s domain in Murcia, implying the infante’s implicit consent in the matter. As Alfonso’s malady advanced and he became increasingly irrational, Infante Sancho was ever more inclined to seek the counsel and support he needed from his two uncles, Infante ­Manuel and ­Pedro III. In time, these three would become the nucleus around which most serious political opposition to ­Alfonso X would evolve. In order to address the siege of Algeciras more effectively, in June 1279 Alfonso set out for Seville, where he would remain until the beginning of June 1280. Infante Manuel did not accompany the king at this time but travelled in the retinue of his nephew Sancho. Recent incursions by the rebels Lope Díaz de Haro in the north and Juan Núñez de Lara in the south around the kingdom of Valencia had intensified, keeping both Sancho and Manuel from assisting the war effort in S ­ eville. At about this time, Infante Sancho learned that the king’s tax collector, Don Zag, had acquired a large sum of money destined to fund the siege of Algeciras, and forced the almojarife to surrender these funds, which he then used to purchase Queen Violante’s safe return to Castile. Without these anticipated revenues to support the war effort, Alfonso X was obliged to abandon the siege of Algeciras. The trust and confidence the king had placed in his son was seriously undermined by Sancho’s irresponsible actions, and henceforth the bonds between the two would be increasingly strained. On the other hand, as ­Alfonso’s power and ­influence over his son began to wane, Infante Manuel’s relationship



Epilogue 291

with the young prince intensified to the extent that he soon became Sancho’s chief source of counsel and guidance. By midsummer 1280, Alfonso X was once again incapacitated by an affliction that nearly caused him to lose an eye, and during this episode directed Sancho to raise an army in the north and proceed south to invade the plane of Granada. Reaching Alcalá de Benzayde, Infante Sancho despatched the vanguard of the invasionary force headed by the master of the Order of Santiago, with orders to seize the M ­ udéjar castle of Moclín; but the invaders were ambushed with the virtual annihilation of the knights of Santiago. So great was the devastation that the king was obliged to combine the remnants of the Order with the knights of the newly created Order of Santa María de España. At this juncture, Infante Manuel realized that his essential political and spiritual identity as a knight of Santiago had been obliterated, and that this was yet another disaster caused by the increasingly irrational behaviour of his brother the king. Sometime in the fall of that year the beleaguered monarch, angry and frustrated by the loss of Algeciras and the destruction of the Order of Santiago – both of which he imputed to Sancho – and intending to humiliate his son for these failures, ordered the execution of Don Zag. This effectively set Sancho on a course of action that would shortly thereafter lead to a rebellion against his father’s rule, and is equally important for determining Infante Manuel’s future alignment with his nephew’s insurrection. In December 1280, Alfonso X and Manuel travelled to Bayonne to meet with Philippe III of France in an attempt to resolve the conflict between them engendered by Alfonso’s appointment of Sancho as his heir instead of the French king’s nephews, the de la Cerda children, who were still in the custody of Pedro III in Játiva. Alfonso X offered to create a separate kingdom for Alfonso de la Cerda in Jaén, where he would become a vassal of Sancho, but the infante was violently ­opposed, arguing it would be to everyone’s advantage to form an alliance with Pedro III since the king of France could not easily overcome the combined forces of Castile and Aragón. Certainly, Sancho would not have been able to persuade his father of the practicality of such an ­arrangement without the assistance and counsel of Infante Manuel. In the midst of this political turmoil, Infante Manuel would have to decide whether to continue to support his infirm and often irrational brother Alfonso X, whose weak and indecisive management of the de la Cerda inheritance and the economy of his kingdom had effectively alienated Infante Sancho and Philippe III, or to align his fortunes with the heir apparent and his brother-in-law the king of Aragón, both of whom were determined to preserve their political and territorial integrity in the face of mounting threats by the French.

292

Dawn of a Dynasty

At this juncture, the monarch himself seems to have been acutely aware of his own inability to rule unaided and openly alludes to shared governance and a legislative triumvirate now ruling the country: Alfonso X, Sancho, and Manuel. In the spring of 1281, pursuant to ­Sancho’s advice to form an alliance with Pedro III, the king reached an accord with his Aragonese brother-in-law promising to give him Infante ­Manuel’s domain in the strategic Valle de Ayora on the frontier between Valencia and Castile. The agreements signed at Ágreda and Campillo were entirely favourable to Pedro III, while Alfonso X appeared to gain little if any advantage in the negotiations. Infante ­Manuel was compensated for his loss with the town and castle of ­Escalona. Though the Crónica de Alfonso X appears to cite Infante ­Manuel’s loss of the Valle de Ayora as a primary source of his immediate dissatisfaction with the king, we must remember that Manuel and Sancho, in the context of the monarch’s intensifying physical and mental instability, had colluded closely with Pedro III during the past year and were fully anticipating Sancho’s imminent rise to power, when Manuel would be amply compensated for these deprivations. It is significant that both Manuel and Sancho in their confirmation of the documents pledged fealty to Pedro III, declaring themselves vassals of the king of Aragón. Between August and December 1281, Infante Manuel and his wife ­Beatrice took up residence in the castle of Escalona, where on 5 May 1282, the eve of the feast of St. John ad Portam Latinam, their son was born and baptized with the saint’s name. That same fall, Infante ­Sancho’s brief assault on Granada together with the protracted conflict in ­Andalusia against the Marinids began to wreak havoc on the royal treasury, and Alfonso X once again found himself in dire financial straits, obliging him to convoke the cortes in search of desperately needed revenue. Meanwhile, he continued to contemplate a reasonable solution to the plight of the infantes de la Cerda by creating a kingdom for them in Jaén, further alienating Infante Sancho, who now asked the monarch for permission to travel to Córdoba where he purportedly planned to arrange a truce with Granada, though he had, in fact, begun to enlist his brothers Pedro, Juan, and Jaime in support of his rebellion. The staggering financial exactions the king imposed on the delegates in the cortes of Seville were swiftly appealed to Infante Sancho, who now felt emboldened by the increasingly robust support he was receiving from all sides. Sometime following the cortes, Queen Violante abandoned the court in Seville for her feudal domain in Valladolid, where she awaited the arrival of her sons Sancho, Pedro, Juan, and Jaime who, together with their uncle Infante Manuel, would strategize the deposition of Alfonso X in the New Year.



Epilogue 293

By the middle of April 1282, Infante Sancho and Infante Manuel had arrived in Valladolid, where the young heir to the throne convoked an assembly of the great lords, prelates, and representatives of the realm. Once again, Infante Manuel seized the initiative, asserting himself as the voice of reason in the midst of political uncertainty. As the elder statesman of the royal household, he returned to his time-tested role as a trustworthy diplomat and reliable policymaker, articulating the crucial justifications his nephew now required to validate his questionable insurrection. Sancho would later reward his support with the i­ nheritance of Chinchilla, Jorquera, Almansa, Aspe, and Ves, all of which formed part of the infante’s contiguous domain in the kingdom of Murcia in the area known as the Mancha de Montaragón. The assembly in Valladolid led to the formation of a number of ­hermandades, brotherhoods or associations created for mutual protection and to defend themselves against the arbitrary actions of the king, who was retaliating against them wherever he could. By July Sancho had transferred his locus of operations to Córdoba, where he met with the grand masters of the Military Orders of Calatrava and Alcántara, the prior of the Hospitallers, the grand master of Santiago, and the commander of the Knights Templar. Infante Manuel was also among those journeying south in his nephew’s retinue, and travelled from there towards his own domain in Murcia. At this point the beleaguered monarch, in an unexpected turn of events, appealed to his perennial adversary Abu Yusuf, the Marinid ruler of Morocco, to support him in his struggle against the insurgents. By early September, the combined forces of Alfonso X and Abu Yusuf planned to launch an assault on Infante Sancho and the rebels in Córdoba but abandoned the siege soon after. In the meantime, Infante Manuel left Murcia and joined Sancho in Córdoba, where he remained with his nephew’s entourage until early in 1283, when both of them set out for Castile and León. It had from the outset of the rebellion been difficult to hold the diverse elements of the insurrection together, and now there were increasing signs of dissension among the ranks of nobles and commoners alike. The physical presence of Sancho and Manuel in the north was urgently required if they were to have any expectation of maintaining a reasonable semblance of government. In fact, the year 1283 would not be propitious for either of them in this regard. Just as quickly as it had arisen, the insurgency began to unravel, and by March 1283 Infante Jaime had returned to his father’s court in ­Seville, where Alfonso X felt sufficiently encouraged to send emissaries to S ­ancho suggesting a truce. The monarch also retaliated against ­Infante Manuel by offering his rebellious son Infante Pedro the

294

Dawn of a Dynasty

kingdom of Murcia, though a counteroffer by Infante Sancho averted this contingency for the time being. Infante Juan, however, had seen the handwriting on the wall and began to seriously consider how he might return to his father’s good graces before he was obligated to do so by a treaty. In August, when Pope Martin IV published a formal condemnation of Infante Sancho and Manuel, issuing an edict excommunicating all those who had risen up against Alfonso X, Infante Juan, with many other insurgents, calculated that this would be a propitious moment to seek reconciliation with the monarch. Soon thereafter, ­Pedro III despatched a message to Infante Manuel’s adelantado in Murcia emphasizing the enduring mutual support the king of Aragón, Infante Sancho, and M ­ anuel continued to provide each other throughout this critical period, acting, in effect, as a single political body in their attempts to secure and maintain the integrity of Castile, León, Aragón, and the ­southeastern sector of the peninsula, especially against the growing threat posed by the Castilian royalists in league with French forces garrisoned in Pamplona. All three, however, now realized the tide was turning against them and that they must act expeditiously to reach some form of compromise with Alfonso X in Seville. Their plan, in essence, would involve a cortes of sorts to be held in Palencia where the representatives of the cities and towns still loyal to the insurgents would determine the best solution for ending the current impasse. Several days later, underscoring the fragility of their coalition, Sancho and Manuel received news of the death of Infante Pedro, who had expired unexpectedly in Ledesma. In November, Alfonso X issued a public statement of disinheritance and malediction against his rebellious son, and from this time forward Infante Sancho’s fortunes were visibly in decline. On that same day, the monarch penned the first version of his last will and testament, reiterating Infante Sancho’s misdeeds and justifying his curse with meticulous historical detail. One of the most poignant passages in the document reflects the sovereign’s profound anguish at Infante Manuel’s desertion, for he was “our brother, whose affection was so deeply rooted in our heart that we considered him to be like a son we loved above all others.” For more than thirty years, Alfonso X had placed his full trust and confidence in Infante Manuel, and Manuel in turn had served the king with a degree of loyalty, sincerity, and discretion that had ­justifiably gained the monarch’s unconditional love and support. His desertion – not his betrayal – was the inevitable consequence of a protracted series of ­ailments that had undermined the king’s health for more than a ­decade. These afflictions, manifested in frequent bouts of intense pain and severe depression, had ultimately deprived the monarch of the ability to



Epilogue 295

think and act reasonably, with the result that he had alienated most of his closest relatives, friends, and allies. At this critical juncture, Infante Manuel knew that to save the kingdom from imminent economic chaos and political dissolution, he must support a more rational government led by his nephew Sancho. His support of Sancho at this critical juncture was not a betrayal of his brother but rather a courageous attempt to prevent the nation from descending into insolvency and disorder. Following the assembly of Palencia during the month of November, Infante Manuel took leave of Sancho and set out for his newly acquired domain of Peñafiel, where he arrived in early December. Scarcely two weeks later, some unforeseen accident or affliction found him at death’s doorstep, surrounded by ten witnesses and seven executors in the Franciscan Convent of Discalced Friars, where he dictated his last will and testament. The extensive and unusually detailed document is a fascinating catalogue of acquisitions made during his lifetime and compendium of reflections on those with whom he had come into contact over the years, as well as, to some extent, a veritable mirror of his own moral and ethical disposition with regard to family, friends, and retainers. Leaving most of his inherited lands and titles to his infant son Juan Manuel, the moribund prince repeatedly asserts his feudal obligations and those of his family to their liege lord, Infante Sancho. In spite of the ministrations diligently provided by his Jewish physicians, Don Zag and Don Abram, he died five days later on Christmas Day. Infante Manuel’s sojourn in this life had ended, but his influence on future generations had only just begun. Alfonso X died four months later in Seville, leaving Infante Sancho as the only viable successor to the throne. Nevertheless, Sancho would become bogged down in an ongoing struggle to maintain his royal authority in the face of a father’s disinheritance and the need to secure an elusive papal dispensation for an incestuous marriage to his cousin, María de Molina, that would cast doubt upon the legitimacy of his own heirs, Fernando IV, Alfonso XI, and Pedro I, for years to come. At the same time, Sancho’s nephews, the dispossessed de la Cerda children, with the support of perennial adherents among the nobility, were unrelenting in their counterclaims to the throne of Castile-León. Sometime during the first half of the fourteenth century, those factions opposed to Sancho’s royal lineage that had disinherited the children of Fernando de la Cerda propagated a legend that predicted Alfonso X would be overthrown by Sancho for having blasphemed against God and for claiming that had he been present at the Creation, a number of improvements would have been made. Juan Manuel was aware of the legend, alluding to it in the Libro de las armas around 1342, referring to

296

Dawn of a Dynasty

a dream Queen Beatrice related to her husband Fernando III when she was expecting Infante Manuel, but without elaborating on the details of the vision. Juan Manuel’s relative Pedro Alfonso, conde de Barcelos, the illegitimate offspring of Alfonso’s grandson, King Dinis of Portugal, and a resident in the court of Alfonso XI from 1317 to 1320, provides an extensive narrative of the matter in the Crónica Geral de Espanha de 1344, where he recounts that one day the king noticed the queen stared for a long time at her infant son Infante Alfonso and began to weep. When asked why she was grieving, she remarked that when she was a child a Greek soothsayer had predicted she would marry Fernando III with whom she would have eight children, and that after his death her first-born son would rule, and that he would be disinherited and cast out from his land except for a single city in which he would die because he had blasphemed against God. According to this legend, Alfonso’s royal lineage would be replaced by the descendants of Infante Manuel, whose heir, Juan ­ Manuel, ­married Blanca de la Cerda, daughter of Fernando II de la Cerda, grandson of Alfonso X, in 1327, affording the opportunity for a resolution not only of the disinheritance of the infantes de la Cerda but of the various legal impediments that continued to beleaguer Sancho’s descendants. In 1350, Juan Manuel’s daughter with Blanca, Juana ­Manuel, ­married Enrique of Trastámara, who became Enrique II, king of Castile, nine years later when he murdered his half-brother Pedro I, Sancho IV’s great-grandson. In 1379, the son of Enrique II and Juana Manuel, ­Infante Manuel’s great-grandson, ascended the throne of Castile as Juan I, effectively extinguishing Sancho IV’s royal line that, ironically, would now be supplanted by the newly established dynasty of his uncle, Infante Manuel (Fig. 4). The politically motivated myth of Alfonso’s sacrilege, designed to discredit the monarch’s person, reign, and royal lineage while conferring legitimacy upon the Trastamaran dynasty and direct descendants of Infante Manuel, had been purposefully anchored in certain historical facts, most notably the recorded devastation left by a thunderstorm in Segovia during August 1258 in which many died and the king’s own residence was struck by lightning, later cited as evidence of divine retribution for his blasphemy. The otherwise creditable historian Diego de Colmenares, when he published his well-respected Historia de S ­ egovia in 1640, fully accepted the fictional account and even described the damage from the storm that could still be seen to that day. In 1386, the dynastic argument was once again proclaimed by Juan I in a discourse delivered to the cortes in Segovia, where he asserted that “[w]e are legitimately descended from the line of King Don



Epilogue 297

Alfonso and of his son Infante Don Fernando whose sons were disinherited by Infante Don Sancho and we are also legitimately descended directly from the line of Infante Don Manuel who was the son of King ­Fernando and King Alfonso our grandfathers.” At some point towards the end of the fourteenth century, the legend was recast by an anonymous ­author whose version is extant in four separate manuscripts from that period, attesting to its widespread popularity and suggesting its ­acceptance as a historical account. In this adaptation of the narrative, an angel ­appeared to King Alfonso and informed him that he had been condemned in Heaven for his blasphemy and refusal to recant, nor had he paid heed to his brother Infante Manuel who warned him of the consequences. The king was reported to have died thirty days later. The myth subsequently flourished and was in full force at least as late as 1470 when the bishop of Palencia, Rodrigo Sánchez de Arévalo, recited the account in his Compendiosa historia hispanica. The narrative subsequently reappeared towards the end of the fifteenth century in the context of the Arthurian legend and the prophecies of Merlin, and was published in the sixteenth century in the Baladro del sabio Merlín y Demanda del Santo Grial (Seville, 1535). The controversial royal line of Alfonso X concluded with the death of Pedro I in 1369, but the Manueline dynasty that commenced with Juan I in 1379 continued until the death of Juana I of Castile in 1555, though in strict genealogical terms it lasted until 1700 when the last Habsburg king, Carlos II, expired without issue; the Manueline line thus constituted the longest-reigning monarchy in the history of Castile. Still, when Felipe V, grandson of the French king Louis XIV, ascended the throne of Spain that same year, he was not only the first Bourbon monarch but also the great nephew of Carlos II and the grandson of C ­ arlos’s sister, María Teresa de Austria, and thus a direct successor in the ­Manueline line. In 1701, Felipe V married María Luisa of Savoy, a direct descendant of Count Amadeus IV of Savoy and the mother of Fernando VI of Spain, so that all future Bourbon monarchs would be related to the House of Savoy through both Infante Manuel’s lineage and the House of Austria. Though the historian and genealogist Gonzalo Argote de Molina declared in 1575 that the current kings of Portugal were directly descended from Infante Manuel, his royal lineage in Portugal was of short duration. Juan Manuel married Constanza de Aragón in 1311, and in 1340 their daughter, Constanza Manuel de Castilla, married Pedro I of Portugal. In 1371, the son of this union, Fernando I, married Leonor Téllez de Meneses whose daughter, Beatrice of Portugal, was joined to Juan I of Castile in 1383. When Beatriz died without issue around 1420, the Manueline line in Portugal was extinguished.

298

Dawn of a Dynasty

Infante Manuel also engendered a nearly two-hundred-year-old ­ ynasty in Aragón when his great-grandson, Juan I of Castile, married d Leonor de Aragón in 1375. Their son, Fernando I de Antequera, became king of Aragón in 1412. Fernando’s son with Leonor de ­Albuquerque was Alfonso V el Magnánimo, and Alfonso’s son, Juan II, was the ­father of Fernando II of Aragón or Fernando V of Castile, so that both the Catholic monarchs, Fernando and Isabel, were directly descended from Infante Manuel. When Fernando V died in 1516, his daughter, Juana I, became nominal queen of Aragón, and the Aragonese dynasty of Infante Manuel was extinguished with her demise in 1555. Infante Manuel also fathered a brief dynasty in the kingdom of Navarre corresponding to the reign of Juan II of Aragón, king of Navarre from 1425 to 1479. Manuel’s lineage also extended to the kingdom of Naples from 1442 to 1516, corresponding to the reign of Alfonso V, king of Aragón, and his descendants, and from 1516 to 1734, corresponding to the reign of Carlos I of Spain or Carlos IV of Naples and his descendants, ending with the death of Carlos III of Spain or Carlos VI of Naples in 1734. Infante Manuel’s ancestral influence resurfaced in the nineteenth century when, following the revolution of 1868 and the exile of I­ sabel II, the cortes approved a constitutional monarchy. Searching from among the royal houses of Europe for a suitable candidate, the cortes selected Amadeus of Savoy. Amadeo I of Spain was a direct descendent of Count Amadeus IV of Savoy, father of Beatrice Contesson, the second wife of Infante Manuel, though it does not appear that this ancient connection was well known to the Spanish people, who considered him a foreigner, or the aristocracy, who regarded the Savoyards as an inferior branch of European royalty. Amadeo I reigned from 1871 to 1873. As the youngest child of Fernando III and Beatrice of Swabia, left with little or no inheritance from his father and virtually no prospects of ever succeeding to the throne, Infante Manuel could not possibly have foreseen that he would in time become the progenitor of the ­longest-reigning royal family in the history of Spain, whose descendants, branching from the House of Manuel de Villena, would continue to hold many of the most important noble titles and positions of m ­ ilitary and political power in Spanish government affairs until the extinction of the line in 1935.

Documentary Appendix

1. Toviella, 1234. Bill of sale transferring property to the Premonstratensian monastery of San Pelayo de Cerrato. In Fernández Martín, “Colección diplomática del Monasterio de San Pelayo de Cerrato,” doc. 9 (297–8). María Díaz vende al monasterio ... el tercio de Tobilla y la aceña de Armillas. Este atorgamiento fue fecho en Villa Mediana ... en el mes de octubre ... Fecha la carta en Toviella en Era de mil e doscientos e setenta y dos annos. Reynant el rey Don Fernando con su muger la reyna donna Beatriz e con sus fijos don Alfonso e don Frederich e don Fernando e don Felip e don Manuel ... Alferez del rey don Lop. Maiordomo don García, merino mayor Alvar Royz. Arzobispo en Toledo Roy Ximénez. Obispo en Palencia don Tell.

2.  Seville, 28 March 1253. Alfonso X issues a charter to Infante Manuel bestowing upon him the village of Heliche. Bullarium Ordinis Militiae de Alcantara, doc. 11 (62–3); DAAX, doc. 16 (14). Do e otorgo a vos mio hermano el infante don Manuel el aldea que dicen Felich, con montes y con pastos, con fuentes y con aguas y con olivares, con vinnas e con huertas, con entradas e con salidas, e con todos sus terminos, e con todos sus derechos e con todas sus pertenencias, assi cuemo quando meyor las ovo en tiempo de moros. Et esta aldea sobredicha vos do e vos otorgo por juro de heredat para siempre que la hayades libre e quita vos y vuestros fijos e vuestros nietos e quantos de vos vinieren que lo vuestro hovieren de heredar, para dar, para vender, para empeñar e para cambiar e para facer de ella todo lo que vos quisieredes cuemo de lo vuestro mismo.

3.  Oxford, October–November 1255. Henry III writes to his clerk John Mansel that he has selected Infante Manuel to marry his daughter ­Beatrice. In Rymer, Foedera, I.ii.6–7. Et est consilium ipsius Comitis super praemissis fere vestro consilio consonum; scilicet, quod Regi Castellae respondeant Nuncii nostri quod ad ea

300

Documentary Appendix

omnia observanda, quae inter nos, & ipsum convenerant, promtam & paratam habemus voluntatem: ... De maritagio filae nostrae consulit idem Comes, ut per Nuncios eosdem, sub omni verborum cautela, respondeatur: Et super hoc dicere poterunt iidem Nuncii quod, cum de terris, quas dictus Rex Castellae dederit, vel daturis fit Domino Emanueli fratri suo, nullam notitiam habeamus. Ex altera parte in terra & potestate ipsius Regis nullus, ut dicitur, jus sibi vendicare potest in suis tenuris, nisi ad voluntatem dicti Regis; et indecentissimum haberetur filiam nostram alcui maritari viventi, nisi homini amplas & convenientes terras & possessiones habenti, & qui a suis terris & possessionibus, pro voluntate sola, & libito sui Principis, non posset destitui. Idem Rex praedictis Nunciis nostris scire faciat in quibus locis, & quanti valoris & commoditatis, providerit, vel providere velit fratri suo, & qualem sibi & haeredibus suis facere voluerit securitatem; ita quod iidem Nuncii nostri praedicti omnia nobis referre valeant, ut super hiis consilium plenius habere possimus. Caveant sibi Nuncii nostri ne, ex suis verbis, occasionem dent Regi praedicto aliquas terras dandi & affirmandi fratri suo, per quod ad dictum maritagium magis obligemur.

4.  Oxford, April 1256. Henry III writes to Alfonso X indicating he will be sending his own envoys to discuss the marriage of his daughter ­Beatrice to Infante Manuel. In Rymer, Foedera, I.ii.13. Sane super hiis, quae per dilectum consanguineum nostrum Tolett. ­Electum, Germanum vestrum, & prudentem virum Garsiam Martini, nobis significastis, videlicet super matrimonio inter fratrem vestrum & filiam nostram contrahendo, & de cruce Affrican. & de facto Vasconiae. Serenitati vestrae praesentibus intimamus quod in hiis, quae vestro & nostro conveniunt ­honori, pronam habentes voluntatem, dilectos & fideles nostros Drog[onem] de ­Barentine,  & Venerabilem virum Thomam, Priorem de Hurle, ad vestrae Celsitudinis ­praesentiam destinamus; qui intentionis nostrae propositum vobis exponent plenius in praemissis; quibus, si placet, super hiis fidem adhibentes, nobis per eosdem significare velitis vestrae beneplacitum voluntatis.1

5.  Oxford, 25 June 1258. Henry III writes to Alfonso X concerning the marriage of his daughter Beatrice to Infante Manuel. In Rymer, Foedera, I.ii.39. De matrimonio contrahendo inter filiam nostram, & unum de fratribus vestris germanis (ad quod Dominum Emanuelem elegistis) revera libenter volumus ut eidem filia nostra nupsiset, sicut alias Serenitati vestrae mandavimus, dummodo dictum fratrem in possessionibus respexissetis, quatinus tale conjugium ex utraque parte deceret; unde nec ipsam adhuc nuptui tradidimus; vos autem fratrem vestrum, secundum quod vobis beneplacuit, maritastis; unde petimus ut de hoc, si placet, de caetero amicabiliter sustinere velitis.



Documentary Appendix

301

6. Definition of the rank and responsibilities of the alférez. In Siete ­Partidas, 2, título 9, ley 16. Et destos el primero et el mas honrado es al alferez que habemos nombrado, ca a él pertenesce de guiar las huestes quando el rey no va hi por su cuerpo, o quando no podiese ir o enviase su poder. Et él mesmo debe tener la seña cada que el rey hobiese de haber batalla campal, et antiguamente él solie justiciar los homes por mandado del rey quando facien por que; et por esto trahie la espada delante dél en señal que era la mayor justicia de la corte. Et bien asi como pertenesce a su oficio de amparar et de acrescentar el regno, otrosi quando alguno feciese perder heredamiento al rey, o villa o castiello, sobre que debiese venir repto, él lo debe facer, et seer abogado para demandarlo. Et eso mesmo debe facer en los otros heredamientos o cosas que pertenesciesen al señorio del rey, si alguno quisiese menguar o encobrir el derecho que el rey hobiese en ellos, maguer fuesen atales sobre que non hobiese repto; et asi como pertenesce a su oficio de facer justiciar los homes honrados quando fecieren por que, otrosi a él pertenesce de pedir merced al rey por los que sean acusados sin culpa. Et él debe dar quien razone los pleytos que hobieren las dueñas viudas et los huérfanos hijosdalgo, quando non hobieren quien razone por ellos nin quien tenga su razon, et otrosi a los que fueren reptados sobre fechos dudosos que non hobieren abogados. Et por todos estos fechos tan granados que el alferez ha de facer conviene en todas guisas que sea home de muy noble linage, porque haya vergüenza de facer cosa que le esté mal; et otrosi porque él ha de justiciar los homes granados que fecieren por que. Et leal debe seer, porque ame la pro del rey et del regno: et entendido et de buen seso ha meester que sea, pues que por él se han de librar los grandes pleytos que acaescen en las huestes: et muy esforzado et sabidor de guerra, pues que él ha de seer como cabdiello mayor sobre las gentes del rey en las batallas. Et quando el alferez tal fuere, débelo el rey amar et fiarse mucho en él, et facerle mucha honra et bien: et si por aventura acaesciese que errase en alguna destas cosas sobredichas, debe haber pena segunt el yerro que feciere (71–2).

7.  Toledo, 18 October 1259. Alfonso X writes to the citizens of Besançon thanking them for their loyalty and support and informing them that he is sending his brother Don Manuel to the Roman Curia to petition the pope to fix a date for his coronation. In Chifflet, Vesontio, 1.222–3; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2, n. 5507. Consilium nostrorum Praelatorum, & Procerum, quos ad nostram Curiam apud Toletum conuocare fecimus, fuit tale, vt nostros sollemnes nuncios, ­videlicet Inclytum Dominum Emmanuelem charissimum fratrem nostrum, & venerabilem Episcopum Segobiensem, ac alios viros nobiles, fidedignos, ad ­Romanam ­Curiam mitteremus supplicaturos summo Pontifici, vt nobis assignet terminum, ad recipiendum Imperij Diadema, & tunc in aduentu eorumdem proponimus partes Imperij Romani potenti, & virtuoso brachio visitare.

302

Documentary Appendix

8. Anagni, 1260. Alexander IV writes to Richard of Cornwall identifying the members of the Castilian delegation to Anagni. In C ­ odex Vindobonensis Philologie, 305, fol. 39, currently Codex 3481 of the  ­Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Handschriften-, Autographenund Nachlaß-Sammlung, in Winkelmann, “Ungedruckte Urkunden,” doc. 17 (99–103). Propter quod cum karissimus in Christo filius noster ... rex Castelle illustris post alios diversos nuncios, quos pro eodem negocio ad nostram presenciam miserat, nunc demum dilectum filium nobilem virum Emanuelem germanum suum cum venerabili fratre nostro ... Segobiensi episcopo et dilectum filium magistrum Johannem, archidiaconum Compostellanum, cum multis aliis ­sollempnibus nunciis ad sedem apostolicam destinavit, per eos instanter ­postulans, ut eum ad coronam evocaremus imperii et ad hoc sibi deberemus statuere certum diem, nos in tam urgentis competicionis instancia tutum medium eligentes, responsum ad petita suspendimus, donec ad eundem regem nuncium specialem miserimus, per quem sibi curamus studio quo possumus pacis consilium suadere.

9. Anagni, 10 April 1260. Alexander IV writes to John of Heslerton ­allowing him to possess three benefices with cure of souls, stating that Infante Manuel has personally vouched for him. In Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación Alejandro IV, doc. 464 (437–8). Iohanni de Heslerton, rectori ecclesie Sancti Petri de Cokefe[u]d2 ­Norwicensis diocesis. Licet ne quis plures ecclesias vel dignitates ecclesiasticas, curam ­animarum habentes, obtineat, sacri concilii constitutio interdicat, consuevit tamen Apostolica Sedes super hoc dispensare cum illis, qui maioribus meritis adiuvantur. Hinc est quod nos, tuorum meritorum super quibus tibi laudabile testimonium perhibetur, obtentu, consideratione quoque dilecti filii, nobilis viri Emmanuelis, germani carissimi in Christo filii nostri ..., illustris regis Castelle ac Legionis, pro te nobis presentialiter supplicantes (sic) tibi auctoritate presentium indulgemus.

10. Anagni, 12 April 1260. Alexander IV writes to the master and knights of the Order of Santiago that he will grant a petition presented by Infante Manuel to enjoy in perpetuity the privilege of having a knight of Santiago in attendance at the pope’s table. In Reg. Vat. 25, fol. 243v, c. 38, published in Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación Alejandro IV, doc. 465 (438–9). Magistro et fratribus militie Sancti Iacobi. Devotionis vestre operosa sinceritas et nobilis viri Emmanuelis, germani carissimi in Christo filii nostri ..., regis Castelle illustris, sincere devocio, necnon et natalium ipsius colenda sublimitas promerentur, ut grata facilitate ipsius petitionibus, ipso nobis porrectis,



Documentary Appendix

303

commode annuamus. Nos igitur, qui ordinem vestrum affectu paterno prosequimur et fiduciam gerimus de vestre fidei puritate, volentes vos Apostolice Sedis favore perpetuo et nostra familiaritate gaudere, consideratione religionis vestre ac prefati E., precibus inclinati, presentium vobis auctoritate concedimus, ut semper unus miles ydoneus et fidelis de ipso ordine ad incidendum in mensa romani pontificis debeat deputari, ita quod illo cedente vel discedente aut etiam decedente, alius ydoneus surrogetur, cuius devoto ministerio vobis Apostolice Sedis et augeatur favor et gratia conservetur.

11. Toledo, 1267. Rodolfo di Poggibonsi, urator, writes to Clement IV providing a Manuel’s embassy to Alexander IV seven Bericht über die Ansprüche des Königs Thron,” 102–3.

King Alfonso’s royal procdetailed account of I­nfante years earlier. In Fanta, “Ein Alfons auf den deutschen

Item quod per eosdem nuntios suos et principum tunc et per alios successive pluries et quam pluries et demum per virum egregium fratrem suum dominum Emanuelem et alios sollempnes nuntios cum eo ad sedem apostolicam destinatos predicto predecessori et fratribus suis humiliter supplicavit, ut eidem invocando eum et inveniendo ac prosequendo ecclesie matris sue deberent favorem impendere, sicut temporibus retrohactis principibus Romanis per ecclesiam fieri consuevit ... Item quod idem predecessor respondens ad ea que proposita fuerunt per dominum Emanuelem fratrem domini regis et alios qui cum eo ad sedem apostolicam accesserunt, dixit se missurum in continenti ad dominum regem nuntium sedis apostolice specialem, qui eidem exparte sedis eiusdem ad omnia et singula per eum proposita verbotenus responderet ... Item quod quondam dominus Andreas de Ferentino, domini pape cappellanus, post dominum Emanuelem in Yspaniam e vestigio veniens, presentatis litteris apostolicis, domino regi dixit et retulit ea ex parte domini pape: quod placeret ei supersedere et expectare, quia intentionis domini pape et fratrum erat super negotio isto ad honorem suum salubriter providere, et quod pro constanti teneret et certus esset quod dominus papa numquam dederat nec dare intendebat domino comiti R[ichardo] in negotio isto favorem in preiudicium vel lesionem iustitie vel honoris domini regis in aliquot ... Item quod idem predecessor requisitus a predicto domino E[manuele], fratre domini regis, et aliis qui cum eo ad sedem apostolicam venerant, si per nuntios vel litteras in Theotonia ullum dicto comiti mandaverat dari favorem, respondit: absit fili, quia nunquam dedimus nec mandavimus dari nec dare intendimus nec aliquid facere per quod karissimi filii nostri fratris tui regis illustris honori in ­aliquo derogetur, et quod fratrem Gualterium Anglicum ad hoc non miserat; et si forte ipse dominum regem Castelle super negotio imperii in aliquo in ­Alamania offendisset, ita graviter puniret eum, quod pena eius ­esset aliis ad terrorem.

304

Documentary Appendix

12. Seville, 8 January 1261. Infante Manuel and his wife Constanza pledge to become confreres of the Order of Santiago. In Rivera G ­ arretas, Encomienda de Uclés, doc. 213 (421). Ofrecemos nuestros cuerpos e nuestras almas a Dios e a Santa María e a la ­Orden de la Cavallería de Sant Yago e fazemos nos ende confreyres e familiares ... E  que si Orden oviéramos a tomar, que tomemos esta Orden de la ­Cavallería de Sant Yago e no otra. Et escogemos sepulturas de nuestros cuerpos e de nuestros fiios e de todo nuestro linage en Uclés. Et offrecemos ... con nuestros cuerpos veinte cinco mill maravedís alfonsís; e d’estos damos luego dos mill maravedís pora fazer capiella en Uclés e por tener y quatro capellanes que canten y m ­ isas por nos e por nuestros defunctos pora sienpre jamás. E los veinte tres mill maravedís somos tenidos de los dar a la Orden a nuestro finamiento, e que los pueda demandar la Orden a todo nuestro heredero e que la Orden conpre d’ellos heredamiento que finque siempre en la Orden por nuestras almas ... Et sobre todo esto, por connoscimiento que vos sodes confreyres e familiares de la nuestra Orden, dámosvos e otorgamos que tengades de la Orden en comienda por en toda vuestra vida de vos amos el nuestro castiello de Faro con villa e con aldeas, e la cannada de Alarcón, e La Presa, e la cannada de Moya [Mora?]3 e los molinos que son en estos logares con todos los derechos que nos y avemos e devemos aver, sacado ende el diezmo que es de la yglesia e de los clérigos de Uclés.

13. Alicante, 20 August 1265. Infante Manuel issues an assurance to the Mudéjars of Elche pledging to pardon them for their sedition if they will surrender to him. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 22 (21–2). Sepan quantos esta carta vieren como nos infante don Emanuel, fijo del rey don Fernando, aseguramos por nos e por quantos después de nos vinieren a los alguaziles e a los alfaquís e a los hombres buenos e a los vieios e a todo el pueblo de la vila de Elig e son término asseguramiento cumplido. E dámoslos la fee de Dios e la su verdad e la nuestra fe e la nuestra verdad que sean salvos e seguros de la nuestra parte e de la parte de quantos de nos viniesen que lo nuestro hovieren de heredar, ellos e sus mugeres e sos fijos e sus companyos e todos sos haveres. E que no los sea demandado ninguna cosa de todo quanto es pasado de muertes de cristianos e de judíos, ni de levantamiento de Elig, nin de quantos cativaron en ell de los nuestros homes, nin de los otros nin de quanto robaron a nos e a ellos de armas e de guarniciones e de bestias e de panyos e de pan e de otras cosas qualesquier que sean. E que no los sea demandado ninguna cosa de cuanto havían de pechar fata agora a nos ni a otro ninguno de ninguna que ovieren de pechar. E quitamoslos todos los drechos nos avían a dar de lo ­passado quitamiento complido que no los sea



Documentary Appendix

305

demandado ninguna cosa de quanto dicho es por nos nin por quantos de nos huviesen. Otrosí, les prometemos por nos y por quantos de nos vinieren que todos aquellos que se quisieren hir de Elig a otros lugares, que vayan salvos e seguros en sus cuerpos, en sus haveres a qual parte quisieren; e el que quisiere vender su heredat e lo que hoviere, que lo pueda vender e tomar so precio. E lo quisiere dexar a otra encomienda, que lo pueda fazer e tomar so derecho. E otrosí otorgamos de guardar a ellos e a quantos vinieren morar a Elig e son término en su ley e en sus fueros e en sus costumbres, assí como era antes que la guerra se començase, e que no les daremos nin crecentaremos ninguna cosa. Otrosí, que el puerto de Santa Pola sea en aquella guisa e en aquella costumbre que era ante de la guerra. E quantos moros vinieren a este puerto por fincar o por pasar, que sean salvos e seguros, e que den el derecho assí como lo davan ante de la guerra. E los moros que fuesen en Elig e en su término que nos den los pechos e los diezmos e los derechos, assi como los daban, nin les pongamos otra costumbre sino la que era ante entre nos e ellos. E esto fazemos porque hayan nuestra merced e nuestro bien fazer assí como lo hicieron siempre. E esto les prometemos a buena fe leyalmente de lo guardar e lo tener e dándoles nuestra carta escripta en latino e en arávigo e sellada con nuestro sello que sea por testimonio entre nos e ellos e quantos de nos venieren por siempre jamas. E prometemos que lo guardaremos e que lo defenderemos e que los empararemos de todos quantos los quisiesen fazer mal por tierra nin por mar. E por esto los prometemos e los damos la fee e la verdad de Dios e la nuestra que lo tenremos e lo compliremos nos e quantos de nos vinieren, assí como es dicho en esta carta. Dada en ­Alicante por nuestro mandado, jueves veinte dias del mes de agosto, en Era de mill e trezientos e tres anyos. Joan Perez la fizo.

14. The Repartimiento de Orihuela, with no specific day or month, attests to land granted there to certain men-at-arms, mounted soldiers in the service of Infante Manuel. In Torres Fontes, ed., 15–79. To Don Berenguer de Moncada, DCCC tahúllas and they were taken from him and he was given in exchange all of Benetibi and Galindo. And of these, DCCC were given to IIII caballerías4 belonging to Don Manuel (15) ... Of the aforementioned grants, four men-at-arms of Don Manuel were given: C tahúllas to Ruy Ferrandes, vassal of Don Manuel. Item, C tahúllas to Blasco Peres, vassal of Don Manuel (30) ... Item, to Pero Nunnes, III solares5 from the caballerías belonging to Don Manuel (45) ... To Lope Peres, Don Manuel’s falconer, C tahúllas (75) ... Item, the king commanded that the following be returned to Don Manuel’s vassals: 57 tahúllas to Ibáñez Escerdo. Item, 40 tahúllas to G. Ermengau. Item, 4 and a half tahúllas for the garden of Pedro d’Osca and 4 tahúllas for the garden of Marqués (79).

306

Documentary Appendix

15.  Toledo, 28 October 1266. Document revealing Infante Manuel as a slave holder. Arabic with Spanish trans. in Pons Boigues, Apuntes sobre las escrituras mozárabes toledanas, 258–61; cited in González Palencia, Los mozárabes de Toledo en los siglos XII y XIII, doc. 630 (2.231). En el nombre de Dios piadoso y misericordioso. Pedro Yoanex, criado de D.  Martín Fernández, como Comendador que es de lo que posee en Madrid la Orden de Freires de Calatrava, vendió a Miguel Pethres o Pérez, apoderado, o confidente, del Infante D. Manuel en Rodeles [despoblado hoy llamado ­Rodillas en el partido judicial de Torrijos y término de Novés], tres mamelucos o esclavos, que son: Abdallah b. Abdelaisar, de Hiçnatorab; su mujer Aixa, hija de Kásim b. Chobair, de Murcia, y la hija de ambos, Fátima, de corta edad, en venta verdadera, perfecta, actual y pura, sin condición viciosa ni cláusula de retroventa ni de opción, por el precio cuya cuantía y suma es de 53 mizcales alfonsíes puros o de buena ley. El citado vendedor recibió el precio mencionado del referido comprador, y vino a quedar en su poder y bajo su responsabilidad, y le declaró libre de él, transfiriéndole sobre los dichos esclavos dominio permanente, como el que posee el rico sobre su riqueza y según lo que prescribe la ley tocante a las ventas, compras y devolución del daño. Los garantizó también de robo y hurto, y lo que ocurriere (de gastos) al indicado comprador en el salario de sus hombres, en el alquiler de bestias y en los desembolsos del viaje para dirigirse a cualquier lugar en busca del vendedor y a causa de la expresada garantía, sea a cargo del dicho vendedor y de sus bienes. Sobre todo esto, según consta textualmente [en esta escritura], el dicho vendedor llamó en testimonio contra su persona a quien lo oyó de él, [hallándose] en estado de salud y con capacidad legal para contratar, en 28 de Octubre del año 1304 de la Era española o de Çofar. Fernando b. Domingo b. Fernando. – Pethro b. Chuan Pethres el adib o literato. – Y Romdrigo b. Benedicto b. Domingo b. Abdelaziz.

16. Murcia, 18 December 1266. Infante Manuel dispenses a grant of ­several houses to Pedro Gómez Barroso. In Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 47 (64). Sepan quantos esta carta uieren como yo, infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, do et otorgo a uos Pedro Gomez Barroso vnas cassas en Murçia de que uos sodes tenedor, las que fueron de Aben Yahyel et las de Zeugom Abobedy, que son en Rabat Çabaçala, con vnas tiendas que estan en las paredes de las ­casas, et con vn corral que se tiene con ellas, que fue de Çaad Albalenci que me dieron en acrecimiento. Estas cassas me dieron los partidores con otras tres partes en la villa de Murçia por mandado del rey. Et han por linderos de las tres partes las calles publicas, et de la otra las sos tiendas, et de la otra las cassas que fueron de Martin Suarez, ome de Orrigo Porcel que son agora de maestre Baldouin. Estas cassas sobredichas son en la collaçion de santa Caterina, et otorgo que las aiades libres et quitas por juro de heredat para siempre jamas con



Documentary Appendix

307

todas sus pertenencias, pora dar, pora vender et empennar et camiar et enagenar et pora fazer de ellas et en ellas como de lo uuestro mismo. Et porque esto no uenga en dubda do uos esta carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dado en Murçia, diez et ocho dias de diciembre, Era de mill et trezientos et quatro annos.

17.  Seville, Wednesday, 26 September 1267. Infante Manuel enters into an agreement with Master Juan González and the Order of Calatrava investing in him all property and appurtenances held by the Order in Peñafiel. In Menéndez Pidal, Documentos lingüísticos, doc. 349 (463–4). Connosçuda cosa sea aquantos esta carta uieren, commo yo, jnffante don ­Manuel, ffijo del rey don Fferrando, connozco que recebi de uos, don Johan Gonçaluez, maestre dela orden de Calatraua et del conuento desse mismo logar, todo lo que esta orden sobredicha ha en Pennafiel et enssu termino: casas et vinnas et tierras et molinos et todo quanto uso hy auedes, que lo tenga de uos et dela orden por entodos mios dias. Et otorgo que depues de mios dias, que uos lo dexe todo libre et quito auos et ala orden sobredicha con las meiorias et con los bienes que yo hy feziere, et que ninguno de mios erederos que non uos puedan end enbargar ninguna cosa por ninguna razon. Et por que esto sea mas firme et non uenga en dubda, fiziemos ende dos cartas partidas por.a.b.c. s[ee]lladas con nuestros seellos colgados, la una que tengades uos, maestre, et la orden sobredicha, et yo jnffante don Manuel la otra. Dada en Seuilla, miercoles.xiiij. dias de setienbre, en Era de mill et trezientos et cinco annos. Yo Per Yuannes la escriui.

18.  Villena, 7 December 1267. Infante Manuel issues a charter to the Christian settlers of Elche confirmed by his son Alfonso. In Torres ­Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 35 (31–2). En el nombre de Dios, amen. Sepan quantos este priuilegio vyeren et oyeren como yo, infante don Manuel, fijo del noble et onrrado rey don Ferrando et de la regina donna Beatriz, en uno con don Alfonso, mio fijo primero et heredero, por sabor que he de fazer bien et merced a los nuestros pobladores christianos de Elche, otorgoles e doles et confirmoles todos los heredamientos que ellos an en Elche et en so término, assí como yo ge los dí por mis cartas et como ge los dieron por mío mandado, Gil Garzia et Gonçaluo Yuannes et Martín Martínez, mios partidores. Estos heredamientos les do et les otorgo libres et quitos por iuro de heredat pora siempre jamás, pora ellos et a sos fijos et a sos nietos et aquellos que dellos uinieren que lo suyo ayan de heredar, pora dar et uender et empennar et camiar et enagenar et pora fazer dellos et en ellos lo que quisieren como de lo suyo mismo, en tal manera que lo non puedan uender del dia que este mío priuilegio fue fecho fasta cinco annos, et que nunca se puedan uender en ningun logar fuora de mío segnorío nin de míos herederos et que sea siempre término de Elche. E todos estos pobladores que agora son et daquí adelante serán, que me tengan todauía casas pobladas en el mío puerto de Sancta Pola, luego que será labrado, et los que ouieren cauallerías que tengan cauallos et armas, et los

308

Documentary Appendix

que ouieren peonías que las mantengan et que tengan casas pobladas en el mío puerto sobredicho. Et dogelos con aquellas franquezas et con aquel fuero que el rey don Alfonso mío hermano dio al conceio de la noble cibdad de Seuilla. Otrosí, les do et les otorgo que en todo pleyto de todas querelas que los uezinos ayan unos contra otros, que se puedan entre sí auenir fasta diez días, sacado el omezillo que el sennor aya a auer. Otrosí, les do e les otorgo que nyngun alcayde nin merino nin otro omne ninguno que non les aya que ueher nin que contrallar en sos iudizios nin en sus fueros nin en nengunas de sus cosas, si non quanto tienen las alzadas que sean ante el sennor o ante quien el mandare. Otrosí les do e les otorgo que quando algunos de los pobladores fueren en uiage, quiere por mar quiere por tierra, que non sien tenidos de tenir cauallos fasta la uenida si non tardaren más de tres meses, et si más de tres meses tardaren, que tengan y los cauallos et las armas, assí como sos uezinos. Otrosí, les do e les otorgo que si por auentura, lo que Dios non quiera, si perdiesse la uilla d’Elche en alcum tiempo et con la merced et ayuda de Dios yo la cobrasse o míos herederos, que los míos pobladores christianos de Elche o sus herederos que agora sont et daqui adelante serán, por fuerza deste mío priuilegio cobren et hayan todos sus heredamientos cada uno como les auyan en esse tiempo, e todauía que me siruan por mar et por tierra los que oy son et daquí adelante seran a mí et a los míos herederos secondo el conceio de la noble cibdad de Siuilla siruien al rey don Alfonso mio hermano, et qualquier que contra este mío priuilegio fuere el crebrantara o en alguna cosa lo menguara, sea maldicho e descumulgado et aya la yra de Dios et de Santa Maria et yaga con Judas el traydor siempre en los infernos, amen. Et demás, yo enfante don Manuel et míos herederos pedimos merced al noble rey don Alfonso, mío hermano et a sus herederos, que qualquier quel crebantare ho en alguna cosa lo minguare, quel fagan pechar cinco mill maravedís alfonsis en oro, et yo et míos herederos que ge lo acalonemos quanto podieremos et sino que Dios nos lo demande. E porque este priuilegio sia firme pora sempre iamás et nunca en ningún tiempo pueda uenir en dubda, yo enfante don Manuel mande y poner mío seello pendiente, et yo don Alfonso ­Manuel lo confirmo e mande y poner mio seello pendente. Este priuilegio fue hecho en Uillena por mandado del infante don Manuel, miércoles siete dias andados del mes de dizembre, en Era de mill et trezientos et cinco annos [1267]. Yo Pedrianes, omne del infante don Manuel escreuí este priuilegio por mandado de Lázaro Pérez, escriuano e notario del sobredicho sennor infante don Manuel.

19.  Burgos, 5 April 1268. Infante Manuel writes to the town council and government officials of Elche concerning various matters, including the issue of vezindat, complaints against town officials, water rights, and taxes on vianda. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 36 (33). De mi infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, al concejo et a los alcaldes de Elche, salut como a uasallos que amo et en que fío. Sepades que me fiçieron



Documentary Appendix

309

entender que algunos de los uezinos de Elche que non quieren facer uezindat assi como los otros uezinos; ond uos mando que aquellos que uostros uezinos fueren que los constringades et los pendredes de guisa que fagan ueçindat, assí como los otros uezinos de la uilla. Otrosí, mando a los alcaydes de los castiellos que si alguno querela de los sus omes que los paren a drecho ante uos los alcaldes e que non ayan escusa ninguna pora non fazerlo. Otrosí, mando que el agua que auedes quel la aya todo el concejo comunalmientre, también la de Benicanal como de los otros logares fata que yo uaya a la terra. Otrosí, mando que todos aquellos que traxieren uianda a la mi tierra que anden saluos et ­seguros et que ninguno non sea osado de les tomar derecho ninguno, sino assi como era usado ante de la guerra. Otrosí, mando que todos los uezinos de Elche que sean francos por toda la mía tierra assí como lo son en Elche. Otrosí, mando que todos los christianos de Elda que se iudguen poral fuero et por los alcaldes de Elche. Otrosí, mando que los almoxerifes et los sus omnes que los iudgue don Çag, mío almoxerif o quien el posiere en so logar. Et todas estas cosas sobredichas mando que sean tenudas et guardadas assí como sobredicho es, et que ninguno non sea osado de yr contra ninguna dellas, ca qualquier que lo fiziese sepa que me pesaría ende et a el me tornaría por ello. Dada en Burgos, el infante la mandó, jueues.V. días de abril, en Era de mill et CCC et seys annos. Peryuannes la escreuió.

20. Burgos, 3 November 1268. Infante Manuel purchases land and homes located in Belbimbre, Fuentedueña, and Sarasona from the ­Hospital del Rey for six hundred maravedís. In Rodríguez López, El Real Monasterio de Las Huelgas de Burgos y el Hospital del Rey, doc. 84 (1.460–1); my translation. Conosçuda cosa sea atodos quantos esta carta uieren como yo Inffante Don ­manuel ffijo del Rey Don fferrando, connozco et otorgo que Reçibo de uos ffray ­Domingo comendador del Ospital del Rey las Casas de Benbibre que a el ­Ospital con quatro molinos et con las vinnas et con los eredamientos et con ­Prados et con Montes et con ffuentes et con uertos et con linos. Et con quantos derechos hay. Et otrosi reçibo las casas et vinnas de ffuente Duenna et los h ­ uertos et con quantos derechos ya el Ospital et deue auer. Otro si lo que a el Ospital en Sarsona Casas et Prados et eredamientos et todos los otros derechos que y a el Ospital. Estas casas et estos heredamientos me diestes por Seyes çientos mrs. que uos di de que uos ffuestes bien pagado. Et yo Don manuel que lo tenga por en toda mi uida et despues que uolo dexe al Ospital libre et quito syn entredicho ninguno con quanto mueble uos me diestes segunt la carta que tenedes de mi de quanto mueble me dexastes et yo de uos Reçebi. Et con quanta meioria fiziere yo y. Et si alguno quisier pasar quier ffijo o heredero que yo aya, contra esta mi carta que uos peche mill. morabetines, et lo que demandare nol uala, quanto en razon destas casas con sus heredamientos de los heredamientos ssobredichos. Et yo ffray domingo comendador ssobredicho Otorgo auos Inffante Don manuel

310

Documentary Appendix

nuestro sennor estas casas con sos heredamientos assi como es sobredicho por Seyes cientos mrs. que me diestes de que yo so bien pagado. Et yo otorgo uolo por en toda uuestra uida por mi et por mandamiento de uuestra hermana la ­Yffante Donna berenguela. Et por que esto sea mas ffirme et non uenga en dubda, yo Infante don Manuel et yo ffray Domingo comendador mandamos ffazer dos cartas partidas por Abece, seelladas con nuestros seellos pendientes. Et con el seello del Conceio de ffuente Duenna en cuyo Termino son estas casas et estos heredamientos destas dos cartas que tenga la una Don ­Manuel et la otra ffray Domingo comendador. Desto son testigos Gomez domingo et Don ­Iohan ­alcalles de ffuente Duenna, Don perez, Iohan munnoz ffijo de sancho uela, Pero perez fijo de don perez. Ffacta carta tres dias andados de Nouiembre. Era de mill et trezientos et Seyes Annos. Et yo Domingo nunno escriuano publico de ffuente Duenna por mandado de nuestro sennor Inffante Don Manuel et de ffray D ­ omingo comendador ffiz esta carta et pus en ella mio signo. Know  all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Fernando, declare and affirm that I receive from you Fray Domingo, knight commander of the King’s Hospital, the houses in Belbimbre that the ­hospital owns together with four mills and the vinyards in Fuentedueña and the ­gardens and all rights therein pertaining to the hospital. Likewise, the houses and ­pastures and lands which the hospital owns in Sarasona and all the rights pertaining to the hospital therein. You gave me these houses and land for six h ­ undred m ­ aravedís which I gave to you and with which you were well pleased. And I, Don Manuel, will have it in tenancy for the rest of my life and after my death I will leave it free and clear to the hospital with no liens ­whatsoever together with all the furnishings you gave me according to the charter which you have from me listing the furnishings you gave me and which I received from you together with any improvements I may make thereto. And if anyone should go against my charter, be they children or heirs that I may have, let them be fined one thousand morabetinos and whatever they claim be invalid with regard to these houses and the aforementiond lands. And I, Fray ­Domingo, aforenamed knight commander, confirm the sale of these houses and lands to you, Don Manuel, our liege lord, for the aforementioned six hundred ­maravedís which you gave me and with which I am well pleased. And I affirm this to be so for the rest of your days and by order of your sister, Infanta Doña Berenguela. And so that this may be more certain and beyond doubt, I, Infante Don Manuel, and I, Fray D ­ omingo, knight commander, command two a.b.c. copies be made and sealed with our pendant seals and with the seal of the town council of F ­ uentedueña within whose boundaries these houses and lands lie. And of these two charters, let Don Manuel keep one and the other, Fray Domingo, knight commander. ­Witnesses thereto: Gómez Domingo and Don Juan, judicial o ­ fficers of Fuentedueña, Don Pérez, Juan Muñoz, son of Sancho Vela, Pero Pérez, son of Don Pérez. This charter was written on the third day of



Documentary Appendix

311

November, Era of one thousand and three hundred and six years [1268]. And I, Domingo Nuño, ­notary public of Fuentedueña, by order of our liege lord Infante Don Manuel and Fray Domingo, knight commander, composed this charter and placed my mark thereon.

21.  Elche, 20 June 1269. Infante Manuel issues a charter to the town council of Elche. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 39 (36). Sepan quantos esta carta uieren como yo enfante don Manuel fijo del rei don Ferrando, por grand sabor que he de fazer bien et merçed al conceio de los mios pobladores de la uilla de Elche, tambien a los que agora y son como a los que hy seran uezinos daqui adelante, otorgoles la particion de las casas que Láçaro Perez et don Guerrero et Johan de Tarragona et Domingo Monçón et Arnalt Bosquet les dieron. Otrosí, les otorgo la particion de las casas et de las heredades que Gonçaluo Yuannes et Martin Martinez et Domingo Perez, mios partidores les dieron o les daran daqui adelante, que lo ayan firme pora siempre iamás ellos et sus fijos et sus nietos et todos aquellos que dellos uenieren que lo suyo ouieren de heredar, saluo ende si alguno no lo touiere poblado assi como yo mandé, que mando a Gil Garçia, mio alcait del Elche et a Gonçaluo Yuannes et a Martin Martinez et a Domingo Perez, mios partidores, que gelo tomen et que lo den a otro que lo pueble. Otrosí, les otorgo que al agua con que se regauan las alcarías do son destas heredades, que la ayan assí como la solíen auer los moros en el so tiempo. Otrosí, les otorgo que las tiendas de los obradores que son dentro de la uilla et las tablas de la [c]arnizería et de la pescadería que las ayan assí libres et quitas et con aquel ençienso et con aquellas franquezas que el rey don Alfonso mío hermano dió las de Murcia a los sus pobladores christianos. Otrosí, les otorgo que aquel fuero et aquellas franquezas que yo dí a los christianos que solían morar en el araual que usen por ello assi como dize el mío priuilegio que tienen de mí, fasta la mi uenida, et entonce yo fablaré con ellos et aquello que entendiere que será mío seruicio et su pro, fazer lo e. Et porque esto sea firme e non uenga en dubda, mandeuos dar esta carta seellada con mío seello pendente. Dada en Elch, joeues uyent dias de junio, Era de mill CCC et siete annos [1269]. Yo Peryuannes la escreuí.

22.  Elche, 27 June 1270. Infante Manuel donates land in Elche to the newly established Order of the Brothers of Ransom or Mercedarians. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 40 (37); Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, 29; my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta uieren como yo infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, por fazer bien et merced a los frailes de Santa Olalla de Barcelona, en remision de mis pecados et por el alma de la infanta donna Constanza, mi muger, do les et otorgoles los banyos viejos que son a la puerta de la Calahorra

312

Documentary Appendix

con el fosario de los moros que es de suso destos banyos en el camino de ­Aliquante, en tal manera que fagan de los banyos una capilla en que digan missa cada dia et que la sieruan ellos et que fagan su officio. Et quiero que el fosario de los christianos que sea en aquel lugar. Et porque esto sea firme et non uenga en dubda doles esta carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Elche uiernes veynte et siete dias de junio, Era de mill et trecientos et ocho annos. Yo Per ­Yuannes la escreui. Yo Johan Peres la fiz escreuir. Know all to whom these presents shall come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Fernando, in order to benefit and support the friars of Santa Olalla de Barcelona, and in remision of my sins, and for the soul of my wife, Infanta Doña Constanza, hereby give and cede to them the old baths located at the ­Calahorra gate together with the cemetery of the Moors which is before the baths on the road to Alicante, that they may construct there a chapel in which they shall say mass every day and serve it and carry out their mission. And I  wish for the Christian cemetery to be located in that same place. And in order that this may be certain and without doubt, I give them this charter with my seal attached.

23. Villena, 4 July 1270. Infante Manuel issues a charter bestowing ­water rights upon the town council of Elche. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 41 (37); my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta uieren como yo infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, por grand sabor que he de fazer bien et merced al conceio de Elche doles dos filos de agua de los mayores del açequia pora regar sus heredades con aquello que ellos ante hy auian. Et otorgo que las ayan libres et quitos pora siempre iamas ellos et aquellos que depues dellos uernan. Et porque esto sea firme et non uenga en dubda doles esta carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Uillena, uiernes quatro dias de julio, Era de mill et trezientos et ocho annos. Yo Per Yuannes la escriui por mandado del sennor don Manuel. Know all to whom these presents shall come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Fernando, greatly desirous of promoting and benefiting the town council of Elche, bequeath them two filos de agua6 from among the largest of the canal to irrigate their lands together with the water they previously had from there. And I give to them and their heirs these filos de agua to have and hold free and clear forever. And in order that this may be certain and without doubt, I give them this charter with my seal attached.

24. Villena, 4 July 1270. Infante Manuel Manuel reconfirms for the town council of Elche a writ issued by his brother Alfonso X in Logroño on 27 January 1270, authorizing them to govern themselves by the laws and franchises that Alfonso had given to the town council of Murcia. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 42 (38). Sepan quantos esta carta uieren commo yo infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, por grand sabor que he de fazer bien et merced al conceio de la



Documentary Appendix

313

uilla de Elche, doles et otorgoles et confirmoles los fueros et las franquezas que el noble rey don Alfonso mio ermano dio al conceio de la cibdat de Murcia. Et porque esto sea firme et non uenga en dubda, doles esta carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Uillena, quatro dias de julio, Era de mill et trezientos et ocho annos. Yo Per Yuannes la escreui por mandado del sennor don Manuel.

25.  Villena, 5 July 1270. Infante Manuel offers his personal assurances to the town council of Elche reconfirming hereditary grants and privileges previously assigned by his partitioners. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 43 (38). Sepan quantos esta carta uieren commo yo infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, otorgo al concejo de la uilla de Elche, a los que agora y son et serán daquí adelant, que las casas et los heredamientos que los míos partidores les dieron et les darán por mío mandado, que lo ayan firme et estable pora siempre iamás teniendolo ellos poblado et faziendo uezindat assí commo yo mandé. Et porque esto sea firme et non uenga en dubda do les esta carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Uillena, sabado cinco dias de julio, Era de mill et trecientos et ocho annos [1270]. Yo Per Yuannes la escriui. Yo Johan Peres la fiz escreuir.

26.  Murcia, 4 May 1271. Alfonso X writes to the town council of Elche in the matter of a dispute between Infante Manuel and the inhabitants of Alicante. In Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios, CODOM 3, doc. 102 (112). Don Alffonso, por la graçia de Dios rey de Castiella, etc. A los conçeiios et a los alguaziles et a los otros aportellados de Elche et de la otra tierra de don Manuel que a en la conquista de Murçia, salut et graçia. Sepades que los de Alicante, ­uestros vezinos, me enbiaron dezir que les non queriedes dar conpra nin vendida de viandas en ninguno de uestros lugares, et que me pidien merçet que ge la mandasse dar. Et yo sobresto fable con mio ermano el inffante don Manuel que les mandasse dar conpra et vendida de viandas por sus dineros en uestros lugares siendo primeramientre abondada su tierra, et el otorgomelo. Onde, uos mando que daqui adelante que les dedes conpra et vendida de toda vianda de uestros lugares por sus dineros et que lo lexedes sacar pora su villa, ca ellos non an tierra de pan sinon poca. Et non fagades ende al et fazermedes en ello seruiçio, ca assi mando a ellos, otrossi, que todo lo que quisierdes comprar en su lugar que uos lo lexen comprar et sacar para uestros lugares. Dada en Murçia lunes quatro dias de mayo, Era de mil et trezientos et nueue anos. Garçia Domingueç, notario del rey en la Andaluzia, la mando fazer por mandado del rey. Pedro Gomeç la fizo.

27. Elche, 10 August 1271. Infante Manuel issues a privilege to the Mudéjars of Elche reflecting a recent, more benevolent attitude towards his Muslim vassals. In Ibarra, Historia de Elche, 74–5.

314

Documentary Appendix

Sepan cuantos esta carta vieren, como yo, infante D. Manuel, hijo del rey D. ­Ferrando, por fazer gracia e merced a los mios moros de Elche e su término e porque ellos se publiquen mejor e se asosieguen tengo por bien e mando que de aquí adelante ninguno no sea osado de les contrallar ni de les embargar ninguna cosa de sus costumbres quales yo he otorgado de que tienen mis cartas e que en toda demanda que aya cristiano o judio contra moro que lo jutgue el alcalde de los moros según manda su Ley salvo los derechos del almoxarifatgo que tengo por bien que los jutgue todavia el mio almoxerif, que lo huviese de recaudar por mí. Otrosí mando que los moros entresí no puedan hir a juicio en las demandas que ovieren unos contra otros, de sus haciendas, sino ante el su alcalde moro. Otrosí que todo moro que sea acusado que le recapden o que dé luego buenas fianzas segun la acusacion que le ficiesen y que sea oido ante el su alcalde y que sea juzgado por su Ley y si se provare que el acusador acusare a sabiendas por malicia, advierto que sea escarmentado según su Ley. Mando a todos los moros que fueren presos que los metan en la carcel de los moros y que los guarde el char medina. Otrosí ningún pecho de nuevo no echen sobre los moros, si non los pechos forzosos á los mis derechos, etc.

28.  Elche, 8 February 1272. Infante Manuel issues a charter granting to Elche the laws and privileges of the town of Murcia. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 49 (44). Sepan quantos este priuilegio uieren commo nos infante don Manuel, fijo del muy noble rey don Ferrando et de la reyna donna Beatriz, en uno con otorgamiento de don Alfonso, mio fijo heredero, por grand sabor que auemos de fazer bien et merced al conceio de la uilla de Elche, tambien a los que y agora y son moradores commo a los que y seran daqui adelante pora siempre iamas, damosles et otorgamosles todos los fueros et todas las franquezas que el muy noble rey don Alfonso my ermano dio et dara al conceio de la cibdat de Murcia con sus priuilegios et con sus cartas. Et mandamos et defendemos que ninguno non sea osado de yr contra este nuestro priuilegio pora quebrantarlo ni pora minguarlo en ninguna cosa, ca cualquier que lo fiziese pesarnos y a et pecharnos y a en coto tres mill morauedis et al conceio todo el danno doblado. Et porque esto sea firme et stable mandamos seellar este priuilegio con nuestro seello colgado, otorgamoslo et confirmamoslo. Et yo don Alfonso el sobredicho otorgo este priuilegio et confirmolo et pongo y mio seello en testimonio. Fecho el priuilegio en Elche, lunes ocho dias de febrero, Era de mill et trezientos et diez annos. Yo Per Yuannez lo escreui.

29. Murcia, 7 March 1272. Alfonso X hears the case of Don Ladrón, a vassal of Infante Manuel in Murcia, accused of violating the law of ­vezindat. In Torres Fontes, ed., Repartimiento de Murcia, 226–8. Domingo, vii dias de março, estando el Rey en Murçia, mando uenir ante si a los caualleros et a los otros omnes absentes, et otrossi a los jurados de las



Documentary Appendix

315

collaçiones que los dieron por absentes, et fallo el rey por el libro de los jurados, que Ladron era absente; et sobresto el pidio merçed al Rey que le oyesse, et el Rey fizolo. Et Ladron dixo que los jurados no le deuieran fazer absente, por que touo et tenia aqui cauallo et armas suyo, et los jurados dixeron que non touiera y, sinon vn omne de pie; et sobresto mando a Garcia Dominguez, su notario, et a Fortuyn Sanchez et a Ponz Carbonel, alcaldes, et Andreo Dodena, que sopiessen esto en uerdat, si es assi commo el dize; et ellos fizieronlo assi. Et sopieron en uerdat, en omnes buenos sabidores del fecho et son estos: J­ ohan de Tormon, uezino de sancta Maria, jurado et preguntado sobresta razon, dixo quel heredamiento que Ladron auie en Murçia, que lo façia bien labra, lo de la compra a moros, et lo de la partiçion de don Gil a christianos. Et de que ouo recebido el heredamiento dela particion de don Gil, que y touo todauia .i. omne de pie fasta agora a un anno, que enbio aqui en la primera sedmana de Quaresma a Fortuyn Garcia et a Martin Roiz et a Diego, un su cormano de ­Ladron, et otros .ii. omnes, et que troxeron vn cauallo et una mula en que trayen sus armas de Ladron, et .x. azconas munteras et .xij. alauesas, et quatro balestas con sus saetas, et sus lorigas de cauallo; et aquell cauallo touolo aqui fasta yer sabado que lo embio con don Manuel, mas dize que dexo y otro cauallo blanco. Et otrossi, dize que ante que el cauallo et las armas enbiasse aqui, que alogo las casas mayores a un judio, por que diesse cada mes dos besantes et .iii. almadraques con otra ropa de jaçer, fasta que uino Ladron. Et dize que quando los jurados de las collaciones fazien la pesquisa, que estos omnes sobredichos de Ladron, posauan en sus casas de Ladron et tenien y estas armas. Preguntado si sabie que Ladron era uasallo de don Manuel a la sazon que ouo este heredamiento et despues a aca, dize que cree que si. Vicent Yuannez. Jurado de la collaçion de Sant Bartholome, que es uno de los quatro jurados que fizieron la pesquisa, era uezino de Ladron y preguntado dize quanto en la lauor de la heredat assi commo Johan de Tormon, et dize que sabe que en las casas non tenie y Ladron sinon aquel su omne de pie Johan Perez et en las casas mayores que posaua Johan Perez. Et las otras que las tenie vn judio aloguer. Et que non sabe el que otros omnes nin otras armas y touiesse, pero que uio et oyo que tenie y azconas suyas, non sabe quantas. Et quando el fue a estas casas con Johan Garcia et con los jurados que fizieron la pesquisa, que non conoçio y el otro omne de Ladron, sinon este Johan Perez. Et que este Johan Perez ni otro ninguno non les dixo que Ladron touiesse y cauallo et armas, ni no era y Ladron, ca era con don Manuel, mas que uio y a Lope de Mendoça et que non sabie si tenie y cauallo et armas. Preguntado si sabie si era uasallo de don Manuel, dize que el oyo que si; preguntado a quien lo oyo, dize que a muchos. Don Martin de Caparroso, labrador, uezino de Sancta Maria, que moraua ante las casas de Ladron, jurado et preguntado dize que se acuerda que de ocho meses en aca, que touo Ladron en sus casas fasta .vi. omnes, de que non sabe los

316

Documentary Appendix

nombres. Et que touo aquí deste mismo tiempo en aca, vn cauallo et fasta a .xii. azconas, et ante deste non sabe que otro ninguno touiesse y, sinon Johan Perez, vn su omne de pie en las vnas casas, et vn judio que moraua en las otras, et que non sabe si y estaua y alloguer o non. Preguntado si sabe que Ladron es uasallo de don Manuel, dize que oyo dezir que si. Pasqual de Caparroso, uezino de Sancta Maria, que mora ante las casas de Ladron, jurado et preguntado dize que siempre uio que Ladron dexo aquí, en sus casas, a Johan Perez, vn su omne de pie, et que otros omnes yuan e uinien, mas que no y fincaua ninguno todauia, sinon este fasta agora a vn anno, un poco ante que el Rey uiniesse que enbio aquí cauallo et armas et .xii. azconas et tragaçetes et balestas et fasta .v. omnes. Et las vnas casas que las tenie allogadas vn judio, et en las otras que moraua este Johan Perez; et que uio que posaua Lope de Mendoça en estas casas con sus omnes et otros caualleros. Domingo Perez, molinero, uezino de Sant Bartolome, que mora ante las casas de Ladron, jurado et preguntado dize que en la lauor de su heredat que non sabe ninguna cosa, mas que uio que fasta que el Rey uino, que Ladron non touo en sus casas sinon Johan Perez, vn su omne de pie. Et otrossi vna bateada, que dize Aldonça, que moraua en ia camereta de las casas aloguer. Et por las ochauas de Nauidat ante que el Rey uiniesse, que uio que enbio aqui cauallo et armas et dos mulas et .xi. azconas. Et que las bestias non sabe si son suyas, pero que uee agora aquel cauallo traer a Ladron. Preguntado si sabe que Ladron es uasallo de don Manuel dize que non sabe.

30. Peñafiel, 16 June 1273. Infante Manuel orders the town council, judges, and good men of Peñafiel to desist from taxing the inhabitants for other than the martiniega and moneda forera. In AHN, Clero-Secular Regular, car. 3435, n. 1, fol. 6r–v; my own transcription and translation. Este es traslado de vna carta del jnfante don Manuel escripta en pergamino de cuero et sellada con vn sello de çera colgado en vna cuerda de seda enel qual sello estauan del vn cabo dos figuras de leones et otras dos figuras de alas con espadas en las manos, et, de la otra parte, figura de vn cauallero en vn cauallo con una espada en la mano et letras enderredor de amas partes que se non podian leer, el tenor de la qual carta es este que se sigue: “De mj jnfante don Manuel, fijo del Rey don Ferrando al conçejo et a los omes buenos et alcalles de Peñafiel. Salut como aquellos que quiero bien et en quien mucho fio. Bien sabedes que los vasallos que moran enel solar del alcaçar de vuestra villa que deuen ser quitos de pecho saluo ende de moneda et de pecho de martinyega que deuen dar por fiel heredamjento que han fuera. Et agora vinjeron a mj et dixieron me que les demandades otros pechos et otros agraujamjentos que non deuedes et marauillome ende mucho. Ende vos mando que non les demandedes otro pecho njnguno sinon martiniega que han de dar por lo que han fuera et la moneda quando viniese, nin les fagades otros agraujamjentos daqui adelante et



Documentary Appendix

317

non fagades ende al et gradeçer vos lo he mucho et sinon sabet que vos lo non consintiria. Et sobresto mando a qual quier que toujere el alcaçar que los anpare et los defienda en todas las cosas que meester oujeren. Dada en Segouja viernes diez et seys dias de junjo, Era de mill et trezientos et honze años. Yo Per Yuanez la fiz escriujr por mandado de don Manuel.” Este traslado fue fecho en Peñafiel sabado primero dia de febrero, año del naçimjento de nuestro saluador Ihesu Christo de mill et trezientos et nouenta et tres años. Tres que estauan presentes que vieron et oyeron leer la dicha carta original: Alfonso Martinez, prestamero, et Johan Ferrandez, fijo de don Diego, vezinos de Peñafiel. Et yo Alfonso Martinez escriuano de nuestro señor el Rey et su notario publico en la su corte et en todos los sus Regnos que vi et ley la dicha carta original onde este traslado saque et escriuy et lo conçerte conella et fiz aquí mjo signo en signo de verdat. From Infante Manuel, son of King Fernando, to the council, good men, and judges of Peñafiel. Greetings and salutations to those whom I love well and in whom I have great trust. You are aware that the vassals who inhabit the area of the castle in your town are exempt from taxes except for the moneda and martiniega that they are obliged to pay for their hereditary holdings outside the castle. And now they have come to me and report that you are demanding of them other unauthorized taxes and levies and I am thereby greatly surprised. I therefore command that you not demand of them any other taxes except the martiniega that they are obliged to pay for their holdings outside the castle, and the moneda whenever it comes due, nor shall you henceforth impose upon them any other levies, nor do other than that which I command you and I shall be most appreciative; otherwise know that I will not give you my consent. And in this regard, I command that whosoever shall be in charge of the castle shall protect and defend them in all things in which they may have need.

31. Lyon, 18 December 1274. Gregory X writes to Infante Manuel ­requesting his support to dissuade his brother Alfonso X from meeting with the pope. In Domínguez Sánchez, ed., Documentos de Gregorio X, doc. 150 (297); my translation. Gregorious episcopus, seruus seruorum Dei. Dilecto filio nobili uiro ­Emanueli, nato clare memorie regis Castelle illustris [salutem et apostolicam benedictionem]. Habet de te fidedigna et nobis admodum grata relatio quod tu, moribus generis nobilitatem ingeminans, hiis que Dei et Ecclesie beneplacitis consonare dinoscis, spontaneum te coaptas, iudicioque rationis obediens, libenter ea que sunt pacis, tanquam regi pacifico grata, prosequeris et dissensiones ac scandala in populis aspernaris. In hiis, fili, si rem fame conformes, et comoda ­salutis inuenies et claritatem nominis prorogandam in posteros consequeris. Ad a­ mpliandum autem salutis tue meritum, hec et hiis similia non solum in te ipso prosequere sed et in aliis, cum datur oportunitas, suggestionis officiose studio operare. Cum itaque venerabilem fratrem nostrum valentinum

318

Documentary Appendix

episcopum, ad carissimi in Christo filii nostri, regis Castelle ac Legionis illustris, germani tui, presentiam destinemus, ea sibi que tam ipsius regis et suorum, quam etiam totius orbis pacificum statum respiciunt, suasurum, magnitudinem tuam monemus, rogamus et hortamur in Domino, in remissionem tuorum ­peccaminum iniungentes, quatinus sic apud eundem regem memorato episcopo in premissis non solum consilio set et ministerio efficacis c­ ooperationis assistas quod idem episcopus, tuo in hiis directus consilio et fultus auxilio, de quibus nobis in hoc spes magna promittitur, prefato regi utilem et votivum nobis effectum suscepte legationis obtineat, tuque apud retributorem bonorum omnium eterne retributionis premium, et apud nos et Sedem Apostolicam uberioris fauoris meritum et digne laudis preconium consequaris. [Datum ­Lugdini, xv kalendas ianuarii, pontificatus nostri anno tertio]. Bishop Gregory, servant of the servants of God. Dear son, noble Lord Emanuel, son of the illustrious king of Castile of glorious memory, salutations and apostolic blessings. We have received concerning you a most gracious and faithful report of your increasingly noble reputation and conduct in harmony with God and the Church, your spontaneity, your judgment and obedience to reason, your willingness to pursue peace in those things pleasing to a peaceful ruler, and your rejection of conflict and dissension in others. In these things, my son, if your reputation is true, and you find gratification in salvation, you will achieve glory in the end. However, in order to increase your merit and salvation, you must pursue this and other similar things not only in yourself but in others as well and, when given the opportunity, act with eagerness and zeal. When, therefore, we send our venerable brother, the bishop of Valence, to meet with our dearly beloved son in Christ, your brother, the illustrious king of Castile and León, concerning matters having to do with the bishop and your brother and also regarding the peace of the entire world, we appeal to your magnanimity, urging you and asking in God’s name and in remission of your sins that, concerning these affairs between your brother and the bishop, you may assist not only in providing counsel but also in your effective cooperation with the bishop’s ministry and the direct support of those things in which we have placed such great hope, that we may with this legation achieve the desired effect concerning the king, and that you may reap the eternal reward of all good things obtaining in a manner worthy of praise both our abundant approval and the admiration of the Apostolic See. Given at Lyon on xv Calends January in the third year of our pontificate.

32. Lyon, 31 December 1274. Gregory X writes to Infante Manuel acknowledging receipt of the infante’s earlier correspondence and ­ ­ requesting that he communicate with him as soon as possible indicating the king’s current state of mind and perceived intentions before their impending deliberations. In Domínguez Sánchez, ed., Documentos de Gregorio X, doc. 155 (303–4); my translation.



Documentary Appendix

319

[Gregorium episcopus, seruus seruorum Dei.] Dilecto filio nobili viro ­Emanueli, clare memorie Fernandi, illustris regis Castelle ac Legionis, filio, [salutem et apostolicam benedictionem]. Litterarum tuarum suauis et accepta descriptio te, iuxta pretereuntis fame preconium, erga nos et Romanam Ecclesiam feruere spiritu deuotionis aperuit et uota tua nostris et Apostolice Sedis beneplacitis proposito inherentia solido nunciauit. Earum itaque sermo perplacidus tanto considerationis nostre iudicium affectibus tuis gratius adesse commonuit quanto mentem tuam in nostra et ipsius Sedis deuotione firmatam maiori constantia et sinceritate descriptis. Hinc uotivum est nobis precibus tuis annuere, illis potissime que nostris affectibus consone, carissimo in Christo filio nostro ... regi Castelle ac Legionis illustri, germano tuo, exhiberi honorificentiam tanto congruentem principi postulabant. Verum, cum honor regis iudicium diligat, uellemus honorandum ipsius, quem premisse tue littere denunciauerunt, aduentum illo circumspectionis iudicio preueniri, ut non solum exteriori letetur applausu, set communiter apud omnes interioris letitie gaudio compleatur. Grandis siquidem et communis erit, nec immerito, causa iocunditatis et gaudii si spiritualis patris et filii fuerit conuentio que speratur, unanimis, non tantum in tractandorum ingressu set in progressu pariter et egressu. Quod speramus facile, Deo auspice, prouenturum si rex idem a se omnem, prout tante descretionis principi congruit, maxime circa Imperii negocium, inordinatum excludat affectum, si mentem suam ad sui Creatoris gratiam ordinet, si eius beneplacito desideria sua non preferat, si priuatis, que vulgaris glorie auram sequens forsitan extimaret, in predicto negotio publica comoda non postponat, sed consultius futura considerans, suis et communibus utilitatibus consulat et nostris in illo persuasionibus quas format iustitia et multa erga ipsum ac suos caritas dirigit, acquiescat. Quia uero in hiis tuum ministerium eo potius utile fore confidimus quo de sinceritate tua potiora ex premissis tuis nobis directis affatibus maioris fiducie argumenta tenemus, nobilitatem tuam monemus, hortamur et affectuose rogamus in Domino, in remissionem tibi peccaminum iniungentes, quatinus apud eundem regem ad premissa sollers et operosus insistens, eius nobis propositum, specialiter super eodem negotio et nostris in illo processibus, de fratrum nostrorum consilio habitis, quos nec omitti iustitia patitur nec remitti, ea nobis studeas celeritate rescribere quod prefatum ipsius regis aduentum congrua, ut desideramus, possimus honorificentia in oportunitate temporis preuenire. ­[Datum Lugduni, ii kalendas ianuarii, pontificatus nostri anno tertio]. [Bishop Gregory, servant of the servants of God.] Beloved son, noble Lord Emanuel, offspring of the illustrious king of glorious memory, Ferdinand of Castile and León, [salutations and apostolic blessings.] We are in receipt of your kind letter and gracious description which, at the same time, omits any craving for recognition, manifesting your fervent spirit of devotion towards us and the Holy Roman Church and declaring your adherence to our firm resolve and that of the Apostolic See. The language of your letter is most pleasing,

320

Documentary Appendix

recalling as much your affectionate consideration of our decisions and greater willingness to serve, as well as for the description of your firm intention to better assist us and the Apostolic See with constancy and sincere devotion. Hence it is our wish to grant your supplications, above all those asking us to appropriately exhibit greater respect towards the emperor, our most beloved son in Christ, your brother, the illustrious king of Castile and León. Certainly, while the king’s honour is worthy of consideration, we want to honour him by circumspectly forestalling his arrival as described in your previous letter so that not only may he rejoice in the applause of those without, but that he may also be satisfied with the general approval of all those within. Indeed, it would be cause for great joy and happiness, nor undeservedly so, if the desire to hold a meeting between the spiritual father and the son were shared by both, not only in dealing with his arrival but equally concerning his departure. What we hope may be brought about without difficulty, God willing, and if the aforesaid king is amenable to these things regarding [the title of] emperor, and most especially concerning the matter of empire, if he would only abandon this mental aberration, if he would order his mind according to the grace of his Creator, if he would be pleased not to publicly display his ambitions, but to do so privately, and perhaps set aside the vulgar pursuit of the glory of gold, and not ignore the general welfare in the aforesaid matter, but more prudently considering the future with greater deliberation, reflecting on both his own and the common good, and our own persuasion in the matter which justice dictates, he would act with greater charity towards himself and his own people, and thus find peace. Since in these matters we are confident your service here may be truly useful, and because we have convincing evidence from your previous letters of your sincerity and fidelity to our candid views, we remind you of your nobility and urge you and affectionately beseech you in God’s name and in the remission of your sins, that skilfully and assiduously persevering in the aforesaid matters concerning the aforesaid king, especially regarding these same issues and our position therein, that you will take counsel with our brothers and, so that justice may be neither disregarded nor diminished, you may in this matter make every effort to quickly write back to us concerning the aforementioned arrival of the king, so that, as is our desire, we may in a timely and honourable manner prepare for this contingency. Given at Lyon, ii Calends January, in the third year of our pontificate.

33. Lyon, April 1275. Gregory X writes to Infante Manuel urging him to be sure to accompany his brother on the journey to Beaucaire. In Domínguez Sánchez, ed., Documentos de Gregorio X, doc. 165 (314); my translation. [Gregorius episcopus, seruus seruorum Dei. Dilecto filio] nobili viro ­Emanueli, clare memorie Ferdinandi, regis Castelle ac Legionis filio, [salutem et apostolicam benedictionem]. Misse nobis nouissime tue littere continebant ­



Documentary Appendix

321

quod i­ntendebas in Franciam proficisci. Cum autem, sicut nosti, carissimus in Christo filius noster rex Castelle ac Legionis illustris, germanus tuus, deputato iam ad hoc certo loco, proponat in proximo conuenire nobiscum, et in hiis que inter nos et ipsum tractanda sunt, tua presentia utilis, Deo auctore, speretur, ­nobilitatem tuam rogamus attentius et hortamur quatinus, si sine dispendio ­fieri potest, uia Francie ad presens omissa, conuentioni huiusmodi una cum rege prefato interesse personaliter non omittas. [Datum Ludguni], ... ­[pontificatus nostri anno quarto]. [Bishop Gregory, servant of the servants of God. Dear son,] noble Lord ­Emanuel, son of the king of Castile and León of glorious memory, [salutations and apostolic blessings]. Your latest letter to us maintained that you were intending to travel to France. Since, as you know, a particular location has already been designated for this purpose, your brother, our dearest son in Christ, the illustrious king of Castile and León, proposes to meet with us shortly and your helpful presence in the issues to be discussed between him and us, God willing, is hoped for. We earnestly appeal to your sense of nobility and urge you that, if it may be accomplished without expense, leaving aside for the present time the road to France, you will not, then, fail to take part personally in the meeting together with the aforesaid king. [Given at Lyon, ... in the third year of our pontificate.]

34. Valence, 17 September 1275. Gregory X denies Infante Manuel’s ­earlier request to organize an expedition to the Holy Land to be financed with a tenth of the ecclesiastical revenues of Portugal. In Domínguez Sánchez, ed., Documentos de Gregorio X, doc. 198 (348). [Gregorious episcopus, seruus seruorum Dei. Dilecto filio] nobili uiro ­Emanuel, nato clare memorie Ferdinandi, regis Castelle ac Legionis [illustris, salutem et apostolicam benedictionem]. Dilectus filius Opizo, miles et nuncius tuus, ­lator praesentium, inter cetera que pro parte tua in presentia nostra proposuit, ­nobis humiliter supplicauit ut cum tu, ob tui reuerentiam Creatoris, qui dignatus est pro redemptione humani generis crucifigi, pretenderes Crucis caractere insigniri, et in Terre Sancte subsidium, cum docenti bellatorii comitiva personaliter proficisci, tibi, ut id efficatius prosequi ualeas, aliquam competentem subuentionem de regni Portugualie decima concedere curaremus. Nos igitur, qui tue deuotionis optentu, sic personam tuam brachiis sincere caritatis amplectimur, quod salutem anime tue spiritualiter affectamus, huiusmodi tuum salubre desiderium in Domino commendantes, scire te uolumus quod cum regnorum carissimi in Christo filio nostri regis Castelle ac Legionis illustris, germani tui, ab imminenti sarracenorum persecutione, in qua te ­regem ipsum deserere non deceret, tranquillato statu ad ea que intendis de subsidio Terre ­predicte, tibi facultas affuerit premisse, supplicationi tue libenter ­quantumcumque poterimus annuemus. Datum Valentie, xv kalendas octobris, [pontificatus nostri anno quarto].

322

Documentary Appendix

35.  Murcia, 20 July 1276. Infante Manuel issues a charter confirming the partition of Elche. In A.M. Elche Libro de privilegios, fol. 26, published in Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 63 (60–1), a text with lacunae supplemented by Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. XXII (123–4); my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta uieren commo yo infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, por sabor que he de fazer bien et merced a los pobladores de Elche que y son et a los que y mando poblar de nueuo, otorgo a Pero Martinez et a don Juste et a Martin Martinez et a cer Bona Senna, mios partidores, que la heredat et huertos et uinnas et casas et oliuares et figuerales que estos mios partidores dieren et entreguen bien et lealmientre a los pobladores commo les yo mande por otra mia carta, que lo ayan otrosi por juro de heredat pora siempre iamas con las franquezas et con los priuilegios que yo di al conceio de Elche. Et otrosi, mando que de quatro annos adelante del dia dell era desta carta que lo puedan dar, uender camiar, empennar et enagenar. Et por fazer mas bien et mas merced a estos pobladores et porque ayan sabor de me poblar bien este lugar, mandoles que adugan el agua de Uillena lo que podieren aduzir a Elch et que lo ayamos yo et ellos segund ouiere heredat cada uno et yo que les puedo ayudar con agua. Et otrossi, les do los filos del agua que tenian agora partida en la azequia mayor de Elche saluo ende aquello que yo e mester pora mi uigna e lo que me caydia otrosi a mi parte pora las aldeas que yo toue pora mi segond cae a las otras heredades por parte. Et porque esto sea firme mande poner en esta carta mio seello colgado. Dada en Murcia ueynte dias de julio, Era de mill et trezientos et quatorze annos. Yo Bernald la fiz escriuir por mandado de don Manuel. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, desirous of promoting and benefiting the settlers of Elche who are presently there and those I command to resettle there, authorize Pero Martínez and Don Juste and Martín Martínez and Sir Bona Senna, my partitioners, that the land and gardens and vineyards and houses and olive orchards and fig groves which my partitioners may assign and apportion to the settlers well and faithfully, even as I have commanded it by my former charter, that they may possess them under oath forever together with the franchises and privileges that I gave to the town council of Elche. And I also command that four years hence from the day and year of this charter that they may give, sell, exchange, use as collateral, or assign such property. And to further promote and benefit these settlers and so that they may willingly settle my land, I command them to bring whatever water they may from Villena and let us and them have it according to the land held by each one and I will help them with water. And I also give them the shares of water they currently have assigned to them from the grand canal of Elche, except for that of which I have need for my vineyard and that which corresponds to my share allocated to the villages that I held according to the provisions established for other individual properties. And in



Documentary Appendix

323

order that this may be firmly established, I commanded my seal to be affixed to this charter. Given in Murcia on the twentieth day of July of the Era one thousand three hundred and fourteen years [1276]. I, Bernald, had this ­recorded by order of Don Manuel.

36.  Murcia, 11 August 1276. Infante Manuel writes to the town c­ ouncil of Elche in the matter of vezindat. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 64 (61), and Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 23 (124–5); my translation. De mi infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, al conceio de Elche, salut commo aquello que quiero bien et en qui mucho fio. Sepades que tengo por bien et mando que todos aquellos que ouieren casas et heredamientos en Elche por uezindat, que fagan uezindat con uuosco et que tengan y sus casas maiores, et que neguno non se escuse seno aquellos a que uos el conceio quisieredes fazer alguna gracia. Otrosi, tengo por bien et mando que todas las demandas et todas las contiendas que acaezieren entre uos que passen primero por uostro fuero delantre uostros alcaldes, et el que se agrauiare del juyzio que se alze o deue et enante non sea ninguno osado de uenir a mi querrellarse sobresta razon. Otrosi, tengo por bien et mando que la soldada del sacristano deste anno passado et daqui adelante que se pague de la parte del tesorero. Dada en Murcia, sabado onze dias de agosto, Era de mill et trezientos quatorce annos. Yo Pere Yuannes la fiz escriuir por mandado de don Manuel. I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, to the town council of Elche, salutations to those whom I love well and in whom I trust. Know that I approve of and command that all those who have homes and property in Elche must register with you regarding vezindat and that there they must maintain their principal dwellings and let none be excused save those to whom the council would grant some favour. Likewise, I approve of and command that all claims and disputes that may arise among you must first be referenced to your laws and resolved by your judges and whosoever may be agrieved at the outcome, let none be so bold as to come unto my presence to complain for this reason. Also, I approve and command that the stipend of the sacristan for the past year be paid henceforth from the treasurer’s account. Given in Murcia, Saturday, on the eleventh day of August of the Era of one thousand three hundred and fourteen years [1276]. I, Pere Yuánnez, caused it to be written by order of Don Manuel.

37.  Murcia, 11 August 1276. Infante Manuel grants the town council of Elche 1,500 tahúllas of land with corresponding water rights and 7,500 tahúllas to be set aside for the most recent settlers. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 65 (61–2), and Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 24 (125); my translation. De mi, infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, al conceio de Elche, salut como aquellos que quiero bien et mucho fio. Sepades que yo e sabor de poblar

324

Documentary Appendix

Elche et fago mios partidores a Pero Martines de Jouera et a don Juste et a çer Bona Senna et a Martin Martines, et mandoles que de las dies mill tafullas que don Yuste et Martin Martines et Johan Gonçales, escriuano, soguearon aruoladas et por aruolar e pora pan leuar, que den a uos el conceio el quarto de todas estas diez mill tafullas bien et complidamiente, tambien de lo meior como de lo mediano, como de lo peor; et este quarto que lo partades en conceio entre uos por cauallerias et por peonias bien et leialmentre. Et las tres partes que las partan estos mios partidores sobredichos a los pobladores nueuos segund que les yo mande. Otrosi, do a uos el conceio el quarto de la mia agua que fica en la azequia conque reguedes este heredamiento que uos do sobredicho. Et porque esto no uenga en dubda, mandeuos dar esta mia carta abierta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Murcia martes XI dias de agosto, Era de mill et trezientos et catorze annos. Yo Pedro Yuannes la fiz escreuir por mandado de don Manuel. I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, to the town council of Elche, salutations to those whom I love well and in whom I trust. Know that I am eager to settle Elche and designate as my partitioners Pero Martínes de Jovera and Don Juste and Sir Bona Senna and Martín Martínes, and I command them to give the 10,000 tafullas that Don Yuste and Martín Martínes and the scribe Johan Gonçales measured with a surveyor’s rope and that are ­either planted with trees or designated to be planted with trees and land designated for cereal crops and that they give to you, the council, one fourth of all these 10,000 tafullas fully and completely, including from among the best, as well as from the average, and from the worst; and let this one fourth be well and faithfully partioned among you for the cauallerías [lands to be awarded to knights] and peonías [lands to be awarded to foot soldiers]. And let the remaining three shares be partitioned by my aforesaid partitioners among the new settlers even as I have commanded them to do. Likewise, I give to you, the council, one fourth of my water rights which remain in the canal to irrigate this aforementioned land that I give to you. And so that there may be no doubt in this ­matter, I commanded that this my public charter be sealed with my seal. Given in M ­ urcia on Tuesday, the eleventh day of August, in the Era of one thousand three hundred and fourteen years [1276]. I, Pedro Yuánnez, caused it to be ­written by order of Don Manuel.

38.  Elche, 8 November 1276. Infante Manuel allocates additional water rights to the settlers and town council of Elche. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 66 (62); also published in Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 25 (126); my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta uieren, como yo infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, por fazer bien et merced al conceio de Elche, tambien a los ­pobladores nueuos como a los que y eran dante, do les las dos partes de toda



Documentary Appendix

325

el agua del azequia de Elch con que rieguen sus heredades, et mando que se parta bien et leialmentre por cauallerias e por peonias. Et por que esto sea firme e non uenga en dubda, mandeles dar esta carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Elch dia domingo VIII dias andados de nouiembre, en el Era de mill et CCC XIIII annos. Rodoriz Yuannes la fiz escriuir por mandado de don Manuel. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, desirous of promoting and benefiting the town council of Elche and the new settlers as well as those who were there before, give them two shares of all the water from the Elche canal with which they may irrigate their lands and I command that they be partitioned well and fairly among the cauallerías and peonías. And so that there may be no doubt in this matter, I commanded them to issue this charter sealed with my seal. Given in Murcia on Sunday, the eighth day of November, in the Era of one thousand three hundred and fourteen years [1276]. Rodoriz Yuánnez caused it to be written by order of Don Manuel.

39.  Almansa, 13 November 1276. Infante Manuel confirms the laws and franchises granted earlier to the town council of Almansa by Alfonso X. In Arch. Hist. Prov. Albacete. Mun. Cap. 4, Perg. 6, published by Pretel Marín, Almansa medieval, doc. 4 (183); my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta vieren commo yo Inffante don Manuel ffijo del rrey don Ferrando por fazer bien e merçed al conçeio de Almansa, doles e otórgoles todos los ffueros e las ffranquezas que el rrey don Alffonso mio hermano les dio, et mando e deffiendo firme mente quen ninguno non sea osado de yr contra ellas nin de gelas quebrantar por ninguna manera, si non, qualquier que lo fiziesse pechar me ye en pena mill maravedis de la moneda nueua e a ellos el danno doblado. Et por que esto sea mas firme e non uenga en dubda, mande les dar ende esta carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Almansa, treze dias de nouienbre, Era de mill e ccc e catorze annos. Yo Alfonso Perez la fiz escreuir por mandado del Inffante don Manuel. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, to promote and benefit the town council of Almansa, confer and authorize the laws and franchises which my brother, King Don Alfonso, gave them, and I command and firmly charge that none shall be so bold as to go against them nor disobey them in any way and anyone who does so will be fined one thousand maravedís of the new money7 and be liable to the town council for double damages. And so that there may be no doubt in this matter, I commanded them to issue this charter sealed with my seal. Given in Almansa on the thirteenth of November in the Era of one thousand three hundred and fourteen years [1276]. I, Alfonso Pérez, caused it to be written by order of Infante Don Manuel.

326

Documentary Appendix

40.  Villena, 13 November 1276. Infante Manuel grants the town of Villena the fuero y franquezas of Lorca. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 67 (63–4); my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta uieren como yo don Joan, fijo del infante don Manuel, vi un privilegio del rey don Sancho seellado con su seello de plomo, que fue fecho en Valladolit veynte e dos dias de mayo, Era de mill a tresientos e traynta e un anno, en que dise que vio una carta que el ovo dado al conceio de Villena quando era infante, en la qual se contiene que por muy grand sabor que el avie de faser bien e merced al conceio de Villena et por ruego del infante don Manuel, mio padre, les otorgo todos los fueros e las franquezas e todas las libertades que el rey don Alfonso su padre dio a la noble villa de Lorca. Et mandó por este privilegio que andudiesen salvos e seguros con todas las cosas que levasen por todas las partes de los regnos del su señorío. Et defiende por el que ninguno non fuese osado de los obligar nin de los tomar diesmo nin portadgo nin otro pecho ninguno. En el qual privillegio se contiene que por mio ruego los confirma la dicha carta que les dio quando era infante. Et asi vi una carta del infante don Manuel, mio padre, fecha en esta guisa: Sepan quantos esta carta vieren commo yo infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, por faser bien e merçed al conçeio e a los pobladores de Villena, tan bien a los que serán como a los que agora son, do e otorgoles el fuero e las franquezas que mio hermano el rey don Alfonso dio e dará al conçeio de Lorca. Et mando et defiendo firmemente que ninguno non sea osado de yr contra el ni de quebrantarlo por ninguna manera, que qualquier que lo fiziese pecharnos y a en pena mill maravedis en oro et al conçeio et danno doblado. Et porque esto sea mas firme et non vaya en dubda mando vos dar esta mi carta seellada con mio sello colgado. Dada en Villena trese dias de noviembre, Era de mill et tresientos et catorce annos. Yo Alfonso la escrivi por mandado de don Manuel. E yo, don Johan, el sobredicho, por muy grand voluntad que he de faser bien et merçed al dicho conçeio de Villena otorgoles e confirmo les el dicho privilleio del rey don Sancho et la dicha carta del infante don Manuel nuestro padre en todo segund en ella se contiene. Onde mando et defiendo que ninguno non sea osado de los passar contra ello en ninguna manera, si non qualquier que lo fisiese pecharme y a en pena mill maravedis de la bona moneda e a ellos todo el danno doblado que por ende reçebiesen. Et porque esto sea firme et non venga en dubda mandeles ende dar esta carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Villena, veynte e seys dias de febrero, Era de mill e tresientos e quarenta e çinco annos. Yo Alfonso Perez la fiz escribir. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Don Juan, son of Infante Don Manuel, saw a privilege granted by King Don Sancho sealed with his lead seal and issued in Valladolid on the twenty-second day of May, in the Era of one thousand three hundred and thirty-one years [1293], in which it is recorded that he saw a charter which he had given to the town council of Villena when he was



Documentary Appendix

327

an infante in which it states that because he is desirous of promoting and benefiting the town council of Villena and at the request of my father, Infante Don Manuel, that he authorized all the fueros and the franquezas and all the freedoms which his father, King Don Alfonso, conferred upon the noble town of Lorca. And with this privilege he commanded that they be allowed to move freely and safely with all their goods throughout all parts of his kingdom. And by this same privilege, he prohibited any from being so bold as to compel them to pay a diezmo [one-tenth of the value of their goods] or toll or any tax whatsoever. In this privilege it states that at my request he confirms this charter which he gave when he was an infante. And thus I saw a charter given by my father, Infante Don Manuel, in this following manner. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Don Ferrando, desirous of promoting and benefiting the council and settlers of Villena, both those who are presently here and those who are to come, authorize and grant them the fuero e las franquezas which my brother, King Don Alfonso, gave and will give to the town council of Lorca. And I command and firmly charge that none shall be so bold as to go against them nor disobey them in any way and anyone who does so will be fined one thousand gold maravedís8 and be liable to the town council for double damages. And so that there may be no doubt in this matter, I command you to issue this charter sealed with my seal. Given in Villena on the thirteenth of November in the Era of one thousand three hundred and fourteen years [1276]. I, Alfonso Pérez, caused it to be written by order of Infante Don Manuel. And I, the aforesaid Don Juan, greatly desirous of promoting and benefiting the aforesaid town council of Villena, authorize and grant them this privilege of King Don Sancho and the charter of my father, Infante Don Manuel, in all ways contained therein. Wherefore I command and charge that none shall be so bold as to trespass against it in any way and anyone who does so shall be fined one thousand maravedís of the good money9 and be liable to the town council for double the damages they may suffer thereby. And so that there may be no doubt in this matter, I commanded them to issue this charter sealed with my seal. Given in Villena on the twenty-sixth day of February in the Era of one thousand three hundred and forty-five years [1307]. I, Alfonso Pérez, caused it to be written.

41.  Barcelona, 7 October 1278. Pedro III writes to Infante Manuel acknowledging receipt of an earlier letter received from him complaining of multiple instances of pillage and robbery on the part of Aragonese marauders based in Alicante who were raiding Castilian territory in the kingdom of Murcia. In ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 84; my transcription and translation. Petrus Dei gracia Rex Aragonae. Inclito et karissimo sororio suo Infanti dompno Emanueli salutem et sincere dilectionis affectum. Recepimus litteras uestras et ipsarum tenore ac etiam ea quae Garcias Sancii miles uester coram nobis ex

328

Documentary Appendix

parte uestra proposuit supra dampnas et rapinis noviter illatis hominibus de Alacante in quibus reputabatis homines multum culpabiles extitisse intelleximus diligenter. Ad quam uobis taliter respondemus quod nobis displicuit et displicet ualde omnis dissensio seu controuersia quae accidit ultra quam accidere oportent inter homines terre illustris Regis Castellae et nostre et prout uos bona satis jam alias obtulimus, nos paratos stare supra talibus cognitores aliquorum bonorum virorum ex parte dictis illustris Regis Castellae et nostra comuniter electorum et nichilominus recipiebantur publice et habebant recursum inteream dicti illustris Regis Castellae malefactores et depredatores cum rapinis et rauberys quas habuerant et extraxerant de terra nostra effere quod ut uobis iam significauimus oportent nos hanc viam assumere, videlicet quod non prosequemur negotium fugitantium ut antea prosequi consueveramus, eos qui rapinas et dampnis inferebant terre et hominibus domini illustris Regis ­Castellae et ita potuit de facili contingere quod homines raptores cognoscentes hoc, et presumserunt inferre dampna quae nobis dicere transmisistis. Nolit autem diligeret uestra credere quod hoc fecerint de consensu nostro nec pro nobis placeat quod fecerunt, nec pro nos ipsos sustinere intendamus immo sunt locis heremis et montuosis ubi ipsos leuiter sine intermissionem aliorum negotiorum nostrorum compellere non possemus et unde etiam dampna sepius inferunt terra nostre et ut uos intelligere possitis bonum et sanum propositum nostrum quod ad hoc heremus noueritis nos mandasse procuratori nostro ­Valencie quod procederet contra eos, praeterea ad hac offerimus ferre quod s­ umus parati stare cognitori provisioni bonorum virorum a parte praedicti ­illustri Regis Castellae et a parte nostra comuniter eligendorum supra omnibus rapinis, furtis et dampnis illatis in frontariis et confinibus regnorum Valencie et Murcie per homines nostros et per homines praedictis illustris Regis ­Castellae siue sint vassalli et naturales sui aut nostri siue receptati in praedictes regnis tempore videlicet preterite et presentis guerre saracenorum. Sumus etiam parati facere et recipere emendas et restitutiones super dictis rapinis, furtis et dampnis sicut teneamus ad cognitorem predictorum domino praedictis illustris Rex Castellae praestet ad hec suum assensum et se obliget sub forma permissa. Et de praedictis ad cautelam fecimus fieri publicum instemus a quo vnum per litteras d ­ iuisum uobis mittemus per dictum nuncium uestrum et etiam hoc p ­ redicto Regi Castellae significandum duximus per nuncium specialem ne aliqui sibi super talibus contractum dare valeant intellectum. Data Barchinona nonae ­octubri anno domini millesimo cc. Lxxviii. Pedro, king of Aragón by the grace of God. To his illustrious and dear ­brother-in-law, Don Manuel, greetings and salutations. We have received your letter and its contents as communicated directly to us by your knight, García Sánchez, concerning the robbery and damages committed by armed men whom you believe to be from Alicante. In this matter we would like to express that we were displeased and it especially displeases us all dissension or controversy



Documentary Appendix

329

that occurs between the men of our land and those of the land of the illustrious king of Castile and just as we have offered you satisfaction in other instances, we are prepared to act upon the evidence provided by witnesses from among good men jointly chosen on behalf of the illustrious king of Castile and us. And, nevertheless, though they were publicly recognized and had recourse to the said illustrious king of Castile, meanwhile malefactors and predators seized and extracted booty and plunder which they carried off from our land, which, as we have pointed out to you, require us to adopt this measure, namely that we will not pursue the matter of the fugitives, those who occasioned the rapine and damages in the land and against the people of the illustrious king of Castile, as we had pursued them before. And thus it easily may be that these robbers, knowing this, presumed to occasion these damages which you have reported to us. Do not, however, choose to believe that they may do this with our consent nor that what they do may please us, nor that we may intend to support them. On the contrary, they are in mountainous wastelands where we may not easily challenge them without interrupting our other affairs whence they are often able to cause damages in our land. And so that you may understand our good and honourable intentions, we have, as you know, sent our bailiff from Valencia to proceed against them and, in addition to that, we offered that we are prepared to recognize a provisional advocate jointly chosen and elected from among the good men representing us and the illlustrious king of Castile to deal with all matters concerning rapine, theft, and damages arising on the frontier or the confines of the kingdoms of Valencia and Murcia among our men and the men of the aforesaid illustrious king of Castile, whether they be his vassals and citizens or ours, or are here in these kingdoms because of past or present war with the Saracens. We are also prepared to make and guarantee corrections and restitution for said rapine, robbery, and damages just as we have agreed to the advocate of the aforementioned good men in the matter of the aforesaid illustrious king of Castile, pending his assent and permission. And in order to ­ensure the aforementioned matters, we have caused to be written letters of a.b.c. which we send to you by way of your aforementioned messenger and also to the aforesaid king of Castile whom we will inform by special messenger. Nor let any go against the sense of the agreement concerning these matters. Given in Barcelona on the Nones of October in the year of our Lord 1278.

42.  Barcelona, 3 January 1279. Pedro III writes to Alfonso X concerning the arrival in Barcelona of a diplomatic mission headed by Infante Manuel together with his own enigmatic comments concerning the purpose of their enterprise. In ACA, Cancillería, Reg. 47, fol. 84v; my transcription and translation. Illustri et magnifico dompno Alfonso, dei gratia Regi Castelle et Toleti, Legionis, Galliçie, Sibilie, etc. Petro per eandem etc. Nouerit excellencia erant nos

330

Documentary Appendix

vidisse inclitum Infantem dompnum Emmanuelem fratrem uestrum, Ferrandi Petri deanum Sibilie, Guillelmus de Rochafolio, et Magistrum Jacobo de Legibus, judicem uestrum, cum litteris uestris continentibus, pro eidem dompno Emmanueli, ex parte uestra, credere deberemus. Quem quidem, letanter audiuimus et tam ea que in litteris continebantur quem ea que ipse nobis, ex parte uestra proponere voluit intelleximus diligenter. Et cum super amore et  aliis inuicem tractauimus, conuenimus super ipsis habere vistas cum inclito et karisimo nepote nostro Infante dompno Sancio, uestro Primogenito et herede, cui plenam potestatem vos impendisse dicebant, super negociis antedictis, et statuimus tempus et locum quibus inuicem interesse debemus, ad quas vistas nos veniemus, et tunc tractata negocia per nos et ipsum diuino mediante auxilio disponerent. Cetera vos rogamos, ut dompnum Emmanuelem predictum, qui interfuit tractatibus istis velitis, si placet, in vistis predictis esse presentem. Data Barchinona iii nones Januarii Anno domini MCCLXXVIII. To the great and illustrious Don Alfonso, king of Castile, Toledo, León, ­Galicia, Sevilla, etc. by the grace of God. From Peter, by the same grace, etc. Know your Excellency that your brother, the eminent Don Manuel, was here to see me together with Ferrán Pérez, dean of Seville, Guillén de Rocafull, and your justice, Master Jacobo de las Leyes, bringing letters from you certified by the same Don Manuel. We were indeed pleased to hear from him concerning those matters contained in the despatches and his own words to us on your behalf to which we diligently attended. And as we spoke of our love and mutual admiration among other things, we agreed that we should meet concerning these matters with our dear and distinguished nephew, Crown Prince Don S ­ ancho, your heir apparent, to whom, they said, you have given full authority to act in the aforesaid matters and we established a mutually agreeable time and place to which we shall come and consequently resolve these matters among ourselves, God willing. As for the rest, we entreat you to permit the aforesaid Don Manuel, who by your leave participated in the discussion of these matters, to be present at the forthcoming meeting, if it so pleases you. Given in Barcelona on the third day of January 1279.

43. Valencia, 3 January 1280. Pedro III writes to Infante Manuel in ­Seville concerning complaints lodged by the infante with regard to recent armed incursions into Castilian territory carried out by Juan Pérez de Vallobar. In ACA, Reg. 47, fols. 92r–v; my transcription and translation. Inclito et dilecto infante dompno Emanueli. Salutem, etc. Litteras dilectas vestras recepimus conuenientas quod Johan Perez de Vallobar qui cum aliquibus peditibus dampnum ducerat nec uenire receptum se cum dictis peditibus et prenda qua secum adduxerunt in villis et locis nostris et quod est post hoc idem Johan Perez faciebat adunarentur en Biar familie ad inferendum maius malum ad quo vobis respondentes, scire vos volumus quod cum eadem audientiam



Documentary Appendix

331

nostram pervenit quod dictus Johan Perez maleficia comiserat supradicta, mandamus districte si in aliquibus locis de nationis nostre ipse ut complices sui reprimentur capti, nobis reservarentur restitutis statim rebus ofertus debet prendere quas penas eos invenirentur. Et si forsan sciuerimus, officiales nostros uel subdites deinde hoc mandamus nostrii in aliquo deficere esse et eos pena debita punitus et de ipse aut Johan Perez cum complicibus et peditibus predictis in villis nostris se receperint et quod ad malum uestrum faciendum faciat congregationem familia in Biar uel aliquo alio loco nostro non debetis credere fere uerum cum nos sciuntur non vellimus tunc sentire ad id uere quid vestris litteris tetigistis de pactis siue posturis quas inter nos et uos initus dicitis et firmatas et non retardamus de ipsis. Licet sicut debito et amoris vinculo quibus nobis sumus astricti nos reputamos coligatos ad omnia qua uestris et uestrorum respicient comodum et honorem. Data Valentia iii nonas januarii anno m.cc.lxx.nono. Dear and illustrious Infante Don Manuel. Salutations, etc. We received your letter concerning Juan Pérez de Vallobar and several of his foot soldiers who were able to cause damage without being apprehended, taking his soldiers and booty back with him into our towns and locals, after which this same Juan Pérez formed a company of militia in Biar to create even greater harm to which we now respond, wishing you to know that as soon as we learned of the evil deeds which said Juan Pérez had committed, we sternly commanded that if he or any of his accomplices were apprehended in any of our locals that they were to be held for us so that we might immediately take them and determine what penalty they should incurr. And if we should learn of any of our officials or subjects who do not do as we command and impose the penalties that they should, or that the same Juan Pérez with his accomplices and foot soldiers have been welcomed in our towns or that they may be forming militias in Biar or in any other locals within our territory, do not doubt that as soon as we have been apprised of this, just as your letters refer to the pacts and agreements we have made between us, that we do not intend to disregard them. It is fitting then that we may strictly observe the bond of love and duty which binds us together in all things concerning your well-being and honour. Given in Valencia the 3rd day of January, 1280.

44.  Biar, February 1280. Pedro III writes to the town council of M ­ urcia excusing himself for his inability to respond favourably to their ­request for an assurance of protection for the citizens of Murcia and their ­belongings from raids originating in Castilian territory, and specifically the Señorío de Villena controlled by Infante Manuel. In ACA, Reg. 42, fol. 215r; my transcription and translation. Scientes quod postulatum per vos assecuramentum vobis et rebus vestris in terra nostra libenter concessissemus, si bono modo possemus illud facere, novit Deus. Sed ex quo nostri subditi male tracttantur, pignorantur et detinentur in

332

Documentary Appendix

terra illustris Regis Castellae, et malefactores cum maleficios, quae fiunt in terra nostra receptantur cotidie, et sustentantur in terra ipsius Regis (super quo nos sepius paratos obtulimus Regi ipsi et fratri suo Infanti Dompno Emanueli, quod illud poneremus in manu omnium personarum, ad quorum notitiam maleficia inter homines forum et nostros invicem facta restiturentur et emendarentur) non videtur nobis pro bono, nec justo modo possimus, nec debeamus opprimendo nostros alios relevare, nec assecuramentum vobis, vel aliis spetialiter concedere memoratum et licet vos in praedictis maleficios culpam non habeatis ... Be aware that pursuant to your request for our pledge to assure your safety and your belongings in our land, that God knows we would gladly give it if we could do so. But in this regard our subjects are ill treated, held as pledges and detained in the land of the illustrious king of Castile and the malefactors who commit these crimes in our land are taken in and protected in the land of this same king and in this context we have often offered to this same king and his brother, Infante Don Manuel, to place the matter in the hands of those who could arrive at a mutually satisfactory solution to make amends and restitution among our men and theirs but we do not see any good or just way to do this nor should we attempt to alleviate this situation by force, nor can we give assurance to you or others in this matter and let it be clear that you are in no way culpable in the aforesaid evil deeds ...

45.  Murcia, 22 June 1280. Infante Manuel despatches a charter to the town council of Elche reconfirming previous donations he had made to them of houses, land, and water rights. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 71 (66); my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta uieren commo nos el infante don Manuel, fijo del muyt noble rey don Ferrando, por sabor que auemos de fazer bien et merced al conceio de la uilla de Elche confirmamosles las casas et todos los heredamientos et aguas que tienen, segond ge lo mandamos dar por donadio o por particion, assi commo son tenedores dello. Et otorgamosles que daqui adelant que puedan comprar et uender et azensar unos de otros casas et heredamientos et aguas. Et aquellos que lo compraren que lo ayan libre et quito pora siempre iamas por juro de heredat pora fazer dello todo lo que quisieren commo de lo suyo mismo, en tal manera que lo non puedan dar ni uender ni enagenar a homnes de orden ni de religion ni de lo sacar de so nostro sennorio. Et porque esto non uenga en dubda mandamosles dar esta carta sellada con nuestro seello colgado. Dada en Murçia, ueynte et dos dias de junio, Era de mill et trecientos et diyce och annos. Yo Rodrig Yuannes la escriui por mandado de don Manuel. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of the very noble King Don Ferrando, desirous of promoting and benefiting the town council of Elche, confirm to them the houses and all hereditary lands and water rights which they now possess, even as I commanded these to be given to them



Documentary Appendix

333

previously by donation or by partition. And we authorize them that from this time forward they may buy, sell, or assess for purposes of taxation these same houses, lands, and water rights. And those who may purchase them, let them own them free and clear forever by swearing to uphold the laws of hereditary possession that they may dispose of them as they wish, as if they were their own property, as long as they do not sell or transfer the land to members of either military or religious orders nor alienate the lands from our domain. And in order that there may be no doubt in this matter, I commanded my seal to be affixed to this charter. Given in Murcia on the twenty-second day of June of the Era one thousand three hundred and eighteen years [1280]. I, Rodrigo Yuánnes, transcribed it by order of Infante Don Manuel.

46.  Murcia, 7 July 1280. Pedro III writes to Infante Manuel attempting to assuage his brother-in-law’s indignation at having been snubbed during a recent sojourn into Aragonese territory. In ACA, Pere el Gran, Reg. 47, fol. 96v; my transcription and translation. Petrus inclite et carissimi fratri plurimam dilegendo amigo Infanti dompno Emanueli, illustris regis Castellae quondam filio quale consentimus dilectionis offerre. Recipimus litteras uestras in quibus nobis significastis et, cum nuper transitum per nostram frontariam faceretis, homines terre nostre uos non reciperunt ut decebat, verum etiam honorarunt, quod nobis displicuit immo magnopere homines nostri uersus uos non se honorent nec uos non recipiant honorifice sicut decet et taliter quod de ipsis deberetis esse contentus verum in pagis nostris quod inter nos non extitit consuetudinem quod si uos circa frontariam nostram transitum facietis per loco nostro, homines nostri uobis deberant obviare nec simili modo homines vestri nobis set si per loco uestro transitum faceremus, homines terre uestre nos non reciperent honorifice atque benigne, istud uobis displiceret. Iam volumus at nobis multum placeret ut quotienscumque uos volueritis terminum nostrum intrare, possitis homines nostros ­mandare et ipsi faciant uobis honorem et praestantiam sicut nobis at receptionem benigna ad aliud quod nobis in uestris litteris intimistis quod a­ liqui hominis nostris malum intenderant in locis nostris supradictis quod uos non sustinerent in locis nostris aliis qui uobis malum faciant siue dampnum immo quoscumque invenirent commorantes in locis nostris in maleficiis terre nostre restitui fecimus maleficia supradicta non cum prohibitionem quia illi qui dampnum receperunt per homines terrae nostrae non possunt illud petere at etiam permaneantur dum non tornent in aliquo loco nostro placeret enim nobis quod petere homines nostros et vestros et cum pignora, non certare cum m ­ artii aut distentionis aliis et quiscumque potius perquirimus et peterimus quod hominibus nostris emendare fecerint et supra homines nostros feceremus integriter emendari. Et scias quoque nobilem Rodericem Eximen de Luna procuratorem Regni Valentie et alios illud terminum fecerunt ac illud adhuc fecerimus

334

Documentary Appendix

libenter et sic verum, recolens cartas publicas, pro testationem referre fecerint supra eis. Data in obsidione Balaguarii nonas julii ut supra [MCCLXXX]. Peter to his illustrious and dear brother, salutations, cherished friend and lord, Infante Manuel, son of the former king of Castile, to whom we offer our love. We have received your letter in which you inform us that when you recently crossed our border, you were not well received as is fitting, nor otherwise with honour, by the men of our land which greatly displeases us, that our men, with whom you should otherwise be pleased, should not show honour towards you nor receive you honourably as is appropriate. In truth, in your district, even as in ours, there exists no tradition that should you cross our border that our men should meet you nor, by the same token, should your men meet us if we crossed through your land and if they did not receive us honourably and benevolently this would displease you. Henceforth, it is our desire and it will please us greatly that whenever you wish to enter our territory you may command our men as you will and they will receive you kindly and treat you with honour and distinction even as they do unto us. As for the other matter to which you refer in your letter, that some of our men in the aforementioned places were ill-­intentioned and did not support you in other places and wronged you or caused you damages, we will compel whoever may be found engaged in wrong doing and dwelling in our land to make restitution for such damages and by not disallowing those who were wronged by our men from seeking restitution of ­damages as long as they remain there and do not return to some other place of ours. We are also pleased that your men and ours may settle matters with pledges of ­security, not to clash with hostilities or other disagreements, and what we would rather seek out and request is that our men may make restitution and we will do this with our men honestly and impartially. And know also that we had the ­noble Rodrigo Eximen de Luna, procurator general of the kingdom of Valencia, and others, establish a boundary to which we will willingly adhere and thus, in truth, considering the published charters, they will personally report on these matters. Given at the siege of Balaguer, Nones of July, as above [MCCLXXX].

47. Murcia, 6 August 1280. Infante Manuel bestows upon Yecla the laws and privileges of Lorca. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 72 (66–7) from a copy of the document made by Juan Manuel and reconfirmed by him on 2 January 1296; my translation. Sepan cuantos esta carta vieren como yo, infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Fernando, por fazer bien y merçed a todos los pobladores que son agora en Yecla e seran de aquí adelante, e por sabor que he de los ayudar e de levar el bien, doles e otorgoles las franquezas y el fuero de Lorca, que me ellos demandaron e pidieron asi como lo di e otorgué al conçejo de Villena. E mando e defiendo que ninguno sea osado de aquí adelante de ir contra ello en ninguna guisa, si non pesarme y a mucho e acolonargelo y a con el rey nuestro hermano e demas



Documentary Appendix

335

a los cuerpos e a lo que ouiesen me tornaria por ello; e porque esto sea firme e non venga en duda mandoles dar esta carta abierta e sellada con mi sello. Dada en Murçia seis dias de agosto, Era de mill e trezientos e diez e ocho años. Yo Domingo Perez lo fiz escriuir. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of the noble King Don Ferrando, desirous of promoting and benefiting both the settlers who are currently in Yecla and those who will be here in the future, and wishing to help them and to foster the commonweal, I approve and give to them the laws and privileges of the fuero of Lorca which they have asked me for even as I approved and gave them to the town council of Villena. And I command that henceforth none shall be so bold as to go against this in any way lest they incur my great displeasure for which they will answer to the king, our brother, with their possessions and their lives. And in order that there may be no doubt in this regard, I command this charter to be made public and my seal to be affixed thereto. Given in Murcia this sixth day of August, Era of one thousand and three hundred and eighteen years [1280]. I, Domingo Pérez, had it written.

48. Alzira, 19 October 1280. Pedro III writes to Infante Manuel in response to an embassy despatched by Manuel to the Aragonese ­ ­monarch protesting certain incursions around Biar by Conrado Lancia. In ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 98v; my transcription and translation. Infanti dompni Manueli et cetera. Vidimus archidiaconem Murcie, Petrum Ffernandi de Pina, Petrum Martinez de Jouera et Alfonssum Ferrandi nuncios quos ad nos destinastis et cetera quos nobis ex parte uestra dixerunt intelleximus diligenter et novit Deus quod praegravat nos multum sicuti aliquis de terra nostra fuit uobis illatum tedium uel gravamen. Tamen quia Conradus Lancea contra quem de hiis vt uestri nuncii exposuerunt praedam habebatur suspicio et non erat praesens, expectavimus donec venisset et cum in crastinum ipse Conradus esse nobiscum, didicimus pro certo quod malefacta qua vobis ut dicitur fuit illata non fuit missa neque adducta apud Biarium nec apud alium locum nostrum quem ipse Conradus sciret et sic non potuimus ad aliud supra eo ad praesens procedere, maxime cum illi de nostro consilio non erant nobiscum et similiter cum eis venire nos proponimus intrare Valentiam ubi sunt aliqui de dicto nostro concilio et similiter cum eis deliberabimus supra praedas et taliter supra praedas procedemus quod vos videbitis nos et in eisdem nostrum debitum adimplere. Data Algecira xiii kalendas novembri anno supradicto [MCCLXXX]. Infante Don Manuel, etc. We saw the archdeacon of Murcia, Pedro F ­ ernández de Pina, Pedro Martínez de Jovera, and Alfonso Ferrández, messengers whom you sent to us and to whom we listened attentively and, God knows, we were very concerned to learn that someone from our land caused you annoyance or displeasure. However, since Conrado Lancia against whom your messengers related these things, suspecting him of looting, was not here, we waited until

336

Documentary Appendix

he arrived and when, on the following day, the same Conrado was with us, we learned for certain that the evil deeds, which it was said he had authored, did not take place either in Biar nor in any other of our locals as far as the same Conrado knows. And thus we are not able at present to act upon the matter, especially since those members of our council were not with us and similarly when they arrive we propose to enter Valencia where others of our council are and likewise with them we will deliberate on this matter of looting and so proceed on the question of pillaging in such a way that you will see that we in these matters will fulfil our duties. Given in Alzira, 14 Kalends November of the above mentioned year [MCCLXXX].

49. Valencia, 13 November 1280. Pedro III writes to his magistrates and bailiff of Guardamar, informing them that merchants and vassals of the king had appeared before him with a letter they received from Infante Manuel requesting restoration of all goods and duties imposed on them; the king commands that full restitution be made. In ACA, Cancillería, Reg. 48, fol. 178v; my transcription and translation. Fidelibus suis alcaldis et  alguaciris de Guardamar: Gilabert et Garciam ­Ferrandus Terrer et Berenguerius Girones, homines nostros, comparuerunt coram nobis et ostenderunt nobis quaedam litteram quam inclitus Infans ­ ­Emanuel uobis mittebat continentis quod faceretis restitueri predictis hominibus nostris et Arnaldo Ogier, eorum socio, et omnes res et merces quas eis fuerunt imperatas seu testatore mandato dicti infantis et eo quia fuerunt inculpati quod timuerant sanacrusanos de parte de quibus quidem ut in predicta littera cotinentur fuerunt reperti precies sine culpa et exposuerunt nobis dicti homines quod vos predicta qua eis fuerunt emptura ad mandatum praemisi infantis restitueri facere noluistis viare. Rogamus et dicimus uobis qualiter predictis hominibus nostris faciatis referens omnes res et merces predictas integrare et sine aliqua diminutione et taliter per ipsos de caterva inde non comportant quaerentur. Alias cum nostris hominibus in jure dificilis non possumus, haberemus eis super praemissis licentiam concedere preciis licendi. Data Valentia idus novembri anno domini MCC LXXX. To his faithful magistrates and bailiffs of Guardamar. Our men, Gilabert and García Ferrando Terrer and Berenguer Girones, appeared before us and delivered to us a certain letter which the illustrious Infante Manuel sent to you in which he requested that you return to the aforesaid men of ours and to their colleague, ­Arnaldo Ogier, all goods and the duties imposed on them according to the testimony given to the aforesaid infante as they were blameless since they had feared the sananteranos/sanacruzanos [?] on whose behalf, certainly, in the aforementioned letter they were found to be completely without blame and these aforesaid men informed us that the aforesaid goods were frequently purchased by command of the infante and that you refused to make restitution. Wherefore having



Documentary Appendix

337

heard the pleas of the aforementioned men of ours, we command that you make full restitution of all aforesaid goods and duties without any diminution and in such a way that if, among other things, we are unable to make restitution to our men should they experience any further unlawful difficulties, we will have to concede to them unrestrained freedom concerning the aforementioned prices. Given in Valencia, the Ides of November in the year of our Lord MCCLXXX.

50.  Barcelona, 18 February 1281. Pedro III writes to Alfonso X referring to the forthcoming discussions between the two sovereigns and the role Infante Manuel and others had played in arranging the meeting. In ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 101v; my transcription and translation. Sabet que viemos don Jordan del Pueyo, uuestro vasallo, con uuestra carta en la qual se contenia que vos placia que las vistas fuessen a aquel plazo que nos a ell dixiemos quando vino a nos a Tolosa, mas que vos semellaua, et que teniades por bien que ante que las vistas fuessen, que fuessen libradas aquellas demandas que vos a nos et nos a vos deuiamos fazer en una destas maneras que foy puesto en mano damigos o por dierecho asi vos queriamos seer amigo et fazer vuobras damigo, que si nos en esta razon queriamos tomar ren de lo uestro, que uos placia que nos tomassemos de lo uestro todas aquellas cosas que guisadas fuessen. A esto vos embiamos dezir que nunqua ouiemos talant de pleictar ni de mouer question a vos, ante sabe don Manuel et los otros qui por vos fablaron desta razon con nosco, que siempre lo estraniamos et ahun somos daquella voluntat misma, A lo al que diziades, que si nos queriamos seer uestro amigo et fazer vebras damigo, sabe lo Dios que nos siempre nos touiemos por uestro amigo et tenemos et en qualquier que vos lo quesiessedes prouar, et ayades quando ata el dia de hoy lo mostramos et lo mostrariamos por uebra. E sobresto nos llegamos ença aquellas prendas et don Jordan vase a por a vos que vos dira aquello que nos ouiemos con ell sobresta razon et vos auredes uestro acuerdo et faredes nos saber lo que por bien touieredes. Data Barchinona xii Kalendas martii. Anno Domini MCCLXXX. Know that we saw Don Jordán del Pueyo, your vassal, with your letter in which you were pleased that the meetings were to be held at the time that we told him when he came to us in Toulouse, except that it seemed to you, and you agreed, that before the meetings we should settle those matters between us in a just and friendly manner and we desire to be your friend and to do things in a friendly manner, as if we were to desire to take nothing of yours and you were pleased that we might take those things of yours which were fitting. In this context, we want you to know that we have never wished to argue with you nor go against you, in fact Don Manuel and the others who spoke of this matter with us on your behalf know that we always avoided this and are still of the same opinion. As for the other things you mentioned, whether we wished to be your friend and settle things in a friendly manner, God knows that we have

338

Documentary Appendix

always considered ourselves to be your friend and still do and we are prepared to show you this in any way that you may consider or may want to prove it to be so up till now. And in this regard, Don Jordán will return to you and relate those things which we have discussed concerning these matters and you will reach your decision and will let us know your pleasure.

51.  San Esteban de Gormaz, 10 March 1281. Alfonso X issues a privilege to the town council of Orihuela, located between Murcia and Infante Manuel’s domain in Elche, supporting its right to control the purchase and sale of farmland recently contested by previous owners who had falsified royal charters. In Estal, Documentos inéditos de Alfonso X el Sabio, 115–17; my translation. Vi vuestra carta que me embiastes en que diziades que los alcaldes a querella de los deudores façian las entegras e las uendidas de las heredades segund manda uestro fuero e que despues aquellos cuyas fueron estas heredades ganauan cartas de mj e del jnfante don Sanch mjo fijo e del jnfante don Manuel mjo hermano e del adelantado de y de la tierra que sse desfagan las uendidas que fueron f­ echas segund uuestro fuero e que me pidiades merçet que uos mandase guardar uuestros priuilegios e uuestros fueros. Et yo tengolo por bien. Onde uos mando que por cartas ningunas que uos lleuan en mjas e del jnfante don Sanch e de don Manuel mjo hermano estas et ningunas heredades uendidas que fueron fechas por los alcaldes segund uuestro fuero manda que ualan ansi que non fueren desfechas segund ningunas destas cartas sobre dichas. I have seen the letter you sent me in which you claim that the magistrates, responding to the complaints of certain debtors, executed the transfer and sale of farmlands according to the dictates of your municipal regulations and that afterwards, those who had previously owned these farmlands obtained letters from me and my son Infante Sancho and my brother Infante Don Manuel and the adelantado of Murcia that invalidated the sales that were made in accordance with your regulations and that you now beseech me to order that your privileges and regulations be upheld. And I authorize it. Wherefore I command that you disregard any letters that purport to be from me, Infante Don Sancho, and my brother Infante Don Manuel which would seek to invalidate any sales duly executed according to your municipal regulations.

52. Elche, 9 August 1281. Infante Manuel issues a warning to his ­adelantado and almojarife, admonishing them to respect and enforce the laws and franchises he had previously dispensed to the town c­ ouncil. In Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 76 (222–3); also in Torres ­Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 74 (68), but with several ­omissions in the text. De mi infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, al mio adelantado et al mio almuxarif de Elche, los que y son agora et que seran caba delante, salut



Documentary Appendix

339

como a aquellos que quiero bien et en qui fio. Fagovos saber, que por fazer bien et merced al concejo de Elche diles et atorgueles fueros et franquezas, de que tienen mis cartas. Onde vos mando que ge las mantengades, et ge las guardedes et non les pasedes a elas en ninguna guisa. Otrossi, non tomedes ni embarguedes a los vezinos que agora y son et seran cabadelante, ningun derecho de los bienes que salliran de sus heredades, et que los puedan sacar, si quisieren por mar o por tierra, non passando contra la mi fe. Et todo esto, que sobredicho es, tenemos por bien que lo ayan libre et quito et franco pora siempre jamas assi, como dicen las otras mis cartas et el privilegio que yo di al concejo quando estas mercedes les fiz. Et otrossi en fecho de las mercadurias que husen et paguen el mio almuxarifadgo, aquellos derechos que deven, assi como usan et pagan los vezinos de Murcia al almuxarifadgo del rey mio hermano. Et non fagades ende al por ninguna manera, si non quanto danyo o menoscabo el conceio recibiesse auran culpa a vos et a lo que oviessedes me tornaria por ello. Dada en Elche, IX dias de agosto, Era de mille CCC XIX annos [1281]. La carta leyda dargela. Yo Johan Perez de Toledo la fiz screvir por mandado de don Manuel.

53. Elche, 10 August 1281. Infante Manuel promulgates an extensive document detailing various privileges and franchises to the M ­ udéjar ­inhabitants of Elche. In Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 75 (69–70). Sepan quantos esta carta vieren como yo, infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando, por fazer gracia e merced a los mios moros de Elche e su termino, e porque ellos se publiquen mejor e se asosieguen, tengo por bien e mando que de aquí adelante ninguno no sea osado de les contrallar ni de les embargar ninguna cosa de sus costumbres quales yo he otorgado, de que tienen mis cartas. E que en toda demanda que aya de cristiano o judio contra moro que los jutgue el alcalde de los moros según manda su ley, salvo los derechos del almoxarifatgo que tengo por bien que los jutgue todavia el mio almoxerif que lo hoviere de recaudar por mi. Otrosi, mando que los moros entre sí non puedan hir a juizio en las demandas que ovieren unos contra otros de sus faziendas, si non ante el su alcalde moro. Otrosi, que todo moro que sea acusado que le recapden o que dé luego buenas fidancas según la acusacion que le ficieren y que sea hoído ante el su alcalde y que sea juzgado por su ley, y si provare que el acusador acusare a sabiendas por malicia, advierto que sea escarmentado según su ley. Mando a todos los moros que fueren presos que los metan en la carcel de los moros y que los guarde el char medina. Otrosi, ningun pecho de nuevo no hechen sobre los moros sino los pechos forçosos a los mis drechos, salvo aquello que toviere por bien de los demandar por mi o por mi carta o si ellos o la mayor parte de ellos se acordasen entre sí de echar algun pecho para mi servicio o para las cosas que oviessen menester que fuese de propio de su comun. Otrosi, pleito del hal Gabbes de las mezquitas que lo recabde Aben Hualit Aben Haben

340

Documentary Appendix

Catif, mio alcalde, según dize en la carta que tiene de mi y que den de ... al mio almoxerif y que esse mio alcalde a consejo de los hombres buenos ponga almostasan aquel que entendieren que es para ello. Otrosi, que el amostasan que va dicho de los moros que el mismo vaya siempre con ellos e non se quite dellos a yda ni a venida de que non les solíen tomar ... de Elche fuesse a sobresto mando al adelantado que fuere por mi en mi tierra a los alcaldes, al alguazil e al mio almoxerif que lo fagan ansi cumplir, e que non consientan a ninguno que contrallo ninguno destas cossas sobredichas; e non fagan ende venir por qualquier que fincasse a el meteran ende por ello; e porque esto sea firme e non venga en dubda mandeles dar esta mi carta seellada con mio seello colgado. Dada en Elche, X dias de agosto, Era de mill trezientos y diez e nueve annos [1281]. Yo Domingo Estevan la escrevi por mandado de don Manuel.

54. Alzira, 28 November 1281. Pedro III writes to Infante Manuel’s adelantado, Sancho Íñiguez, thanking him for sending on with Martín Pérez de Fraga a gift of two hunting dogs and proposing the election of three individuals who would be charged with establishing the boundaries between Ayora and Almansa. In ACA, Reg. 50, fols. 200v–201r; my transcription. Sancio Eneguez adelanto Infantis Dompni Emanuelis, salutem et dilectionem, Noueritis nos vidisse Martinus Petri de Fraga spectare qui nobis adduxit ex parte uestra duos alanos de quibus cum sint idonei et pulcriores vobis referimus multas gratias et sonnus quod habentur faceritis quo nobis complacuit debendum. Etiam Martinus Petri locutus fuit nobiscum ex parte uestra super facto terminorum de Ayora et de Almança de quibus erat contentio inter eos, vnde sciatis quod jam homines uestri d’Ayora hic est duxerunt illud uobis. Et prout propendimus cetera illa de qua est contentio inter ipsos est et fuit seorum/sectorum/semper de terminis de Ayora et cum Almança sufficientes terminos non habuerit fuit suplicantium ex parte ipsius Infanti Emanueli predicto qui tunc dicta loca tenebat quod permiteret homines de Almança entrare ipsam terram per terminis cum militum eis quod decet. Et praedictis hominibus de Ayora in aliquo aliter non possumus immo illud possent comode sustinere maxime cum de eandem dominatione tenent nunc autem cum ipsi homines de Ayora uestri et de juris defectus nostri sint, nolunt sustinere inde sicut/quod tunc eorundum praedictum/de parte dicta sustinebant vnde si uos et ipsi homines de Almança videtis quod jus uere non habueratis in terra praedicta, desistatis et eos desistere faciatis praedictis, si autem jus credunt habere in dicta terra Sanchus/satus praedicti quod mandamus istud factum in [201r] Martinus et idoneis personis de quibus eligatur vna ex parte nostri et dictorum hominum de Ayora et alteri ex parte praedictorum hominum de Almança, tercia autem eligatur de assensu vtriusque partis et placebit quod ipse tres persone decedant dictum factum. Data Algezira iiii kalendas decembris ut supra [1281].



Documentary Appendix

341

55. Alzira, 6 December 1281. Pedro III writes to Sancho Íñiguez referencing a curious incident concerning Feyshurat Elphaque Earisxet, a Saracen vassal of the king, who was captured and detained in Don ­Manuel’s port of Santa Pola. In ACA, Reg. 50, fol. 205v; my transcription. Dilecto suo Sancio Iñeguez adelantato Infantis Dompni Emanuelis, salutem et dilectionem. Intellegimus quod Feyshurat Elphaque Earisxet, sarracenus noster de Coçentayna qui volebat transffretare apud Tunicia quod redimendis filiis suis, fuit captus et detentus in portu dicti dompni Emanuelis quare (mandamus) rogamos vos quatinus faciatis ipsum delibrari ut possit viaticum suum facere si uoluerit uel redire (ab) apud Coçentaina. Et siquis sunt qui ab eo (habea) habeant querimoniam et nos faciemus ab eo sicut justitiae complementum. Data Algezira viij jdus decembris. Scripsit B. Escorna.

56. Villena, 12 August 1282. Infante Manuel issues a charter to the Christian settlers of Chinchilla authorizing recent land grants made by his partitioners to Christian settlers there. In AH Prov. de Albacete, ­Libro de copia de privilegios de Chinchilla, MUN. Leg. 11, fol. 29; published in Pretel Marín, Conquista, doc. 31, p. 287; my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta vieren commo yo, infante don Manuel, fijo del muy noble rey don Ferrando, por mui grant sabor que he de fazer mucho bien e mucha merçed a los mios vasallos que agora son poblados en la mi villa de Chinchilla, e porque sean mas ricos e mas abonados e se pueblen mejor, otorgo les la partiçion que les fizo Sancho Ximenez e Marco Ximenez, mio vasallo, fata aquí, e otrosy que ayan sanas las conpras e las vendidas que fizieron vnos dotros; et por les fazer mas bien e mas merçed, perdono les si algunos y ouo dellos que yoguresen [sic] en pena por razon de justicia o que ouieren a pechar calonna al Rey o a don Sancho o a mi, e quito gelo todo fata el dia que esta carta fue fecha, saluo alef o trayçion. E porque esto sea firme e non venga en dubda, mande les dar esta carta sellada con mio sello colgado, dada en Villena, doze días de agosto, Era de mil e trezientos e veynte annos. Yo Rodrigo Yuannez la escriui por mandado de don Manuel. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of the right noble King Ferrando, desirous of promoting and benefiting my vassals who are presently settled in the town of Chinchilla and that they may do well and prosper and better populate the region, do authorize them the partition that my vassals Sancho Ximenez and Marco Ximenez carried out up to this point and likewise that they may realize unconditionally the purchases and sales which they have made among themselves; and to further benefit and assist them, I pardon them if perchance there be among them some who are under indictment of law or are obliged to pay a fine to the king or to Don Sancho or to me; and I absolve them of these fines from the day this charter was issued, save in cases of duplicity or treachery. And in order that this may be certain and

342

Documentary Appendix

beyond doubt, I have commanded that my seal be affixed to this charter, given in Villena, the twelfth day of August, Era of one thousand three hundred and twenty years [1282]. I, Rodrigo Ybáñez, wrote this by command of Don Manuel.

57.  Villena, 12 August 1282. Infante Manuel issues a second charter to the Christian settlers of Chinchilla reconfirming privileges and franchises recently made to them. In AH Prov. de Albacete, Libro de copia de privilegios de Chinchilla, MUN. Leg. 11, fol. 29; published in Pretel Marín, Conquista, doc. 32 (287); my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta vieren commo yo infante don Manuel, fijo del muy noble rey don Ferrando, por muy grant sabor que he de fazer mucho bien e mucha merçed a los mios vasallos que agora son poblados en la mi villa de ­Chinchilla e serán de aquí adelante, otorgoles el fuero que agora an, e otrosy que les mantenga e les guarde las franquezas e los preuillejos e las cartas plomadas que ellos tienen en esta rrazon. E porque eso sea firme e non venga en dubda, mandeles dar esta carta sellada con mio sello colgado. Dada en Villena, doze días de agosto, Era de mil e trezientos e veynte annos. Yo Rodrigo Yuannez la escriui por mandado de don Manuel. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of the right noble King Ferrando, desirous of promoting and benefiting my vassals who are presently settled in the town of Chinchilla and will be henceforth, do authorize them the rights which they presently enjoy and that I will maintain and keep the franchises and privileges and sealed charters which they have in this regard. And in order that this may be certain and beyond doubt, I have commanded that my seal be affixed to this charter, given in Villena, the twelfth day of August, Era of one thousand three hundred and twenty years [1282]. I, Rodrigo Ybáñez, wrote this by command of Don Manuel.

58.  Burgos, 5 April 1283. Infante Sancho issues a charter transferring the town and castle of Peñafiel to Infante Manuel as a hereditary feudal domain. In AHN, Clero-Secular Regular, Car. 3435, N. 1, fol. 5r–v; my transcription and translation. Nos don Sancho por la gracia de dios Rey de Castiella, de Toledo, de Leon, de Gallizia, de Seuilla, de Cordoua, de Murçia, de Jahen, del Algarbe, viemos vn priuillegio que nos oujemos dado quando eramos jnfante fecho en esta guisa: Sepan quantos este priuillegio vieren como yo jnfante don Sancho fijo mayor heredero del muy noble don Alfonso por la gracia de Dios rey de Castiella, de Toledo, de Leon, de Gallizia, de Seuilla, de Cordoua, de Murçia, de Jaen, del Algarbe, en vno con la jnfante doña Maria mi muger, por muchos serujçios et muchas obras buenas que vos jnfante don Manuel mj tio me avedes fecho, douos la villa que dizen Peña fiel con su castiello et con su alcaçar que es dentro en la villa et con vasallos et con sus termjnos et con sus aldeas et con aguas et con Rios et con pastos, et con montes et con entradas et con salidas, et con todas



Documentary Appendix

343

sus pertenençias et con todos sus derechos quantos yo avia et deuya auer saluo ende que tenga para mi moneda forera et justicia, et si la vos non fizieredes et que me acoxierades en ella yrado o pagado cada que yo quisiere. Otrosi, que fagades della guerra et paz en todo tiempo a mj et a los que regnaren despues de mj en Castiella et en Leon et douos la vien et conplidamiente libre et quita por juro et heredat para siempre jamas para vos et para vuestros fijos et para todos aquellos que de vos vinjeren et lo vuestro oujeren de heredat et que la podades dar et uender et empeñar et camijar et enagenar et façer della et en ella todo lo que vos quisieredes asi como de lo vuestro mesmo ... et mando que herede el fijo vuestro mayor et si fijo varon maior non oujerdes, que herede la fija mayor pero que non podades fazer ninguna destas cosas sobredichas con orden ni con eglesia nin con otro alguno fuera del mj señorio sin mj mandado. Et mando et defiendo firme mente que ninguno non sea osado de querer lo enbargar nin vos lo contrallar en ninguna manera. Et qual quier que lo fiziese pechar me y a mill marauedis de la moneda nueua et a vos el jnfante don Manuel sobredicho todo el daño que ende recibiedes doblado et demas a el et a quien ouiese, me tornaria por ello. Et por que esto sea firme et estable, do ende este priuillegio sellado con mio sello de plomo. Dado en Burgos çinco dias de abril, Era de mill et trezientos et veynte et vn años. Yo el jnfante don Sancho escriui mio nonbre con mj mano. Know all to whom these presents come that I, Infante Don Sancho, eldest son and heir of the noble Don Alfonso, king of Castile, Toledo, León, Galicia, Seville, Córdoba, Murcia, Jaén, and the Algarve, together as one with my wife, Doña María, for the many favours and good deeds which you, my uncle Infante Don Manuel, have performed for me, I hereby cede to you the town called Peñafiel together with its castle and keep which are within the town and with its vassals and boundaries and with its villages and water and rivers and fields and forests and with roads leading in and out and with all its appurtenances and with all the rights which I formerly had thereto and ought to have except for the moneda forera and enforcement of the law, which I retain for myself, and if you fail to do these things, you agree you will be content to accept my judgment whether or not I am pleased or displeased thereby. And likewise that you will support me in war and peace together with all those who rule after me in Castile and in León and I make this assignment to you fully and completely free and clear of any pledge or inheritance to be held in perpetuity by you and your children and by all your descendants who inherit from you and that you may transfer and sell and mortgage and exchange and alienate and do with said assignment whatever you will as if it were your very own ... and I command that your eldest son shall inherit and if you should have no eldest son, that your eldest daughter should inherit. But you may not exercise any of the aforementioned transfers either with a military order or the church or with anyone outside of my sovereignty without my permission. And I command and firmly forbid that any should be so bold as to obstruct or oppose you in any way. And he that may

344

Documentary Appendix

do so shall forfeit to me one thousand maravedís of the new money and pay you double whatever damages you may incur and such individual shall be answerable to me personally. And in order that this may be firmly established, I issue this privilege with my lead seal affixed. Given in Burgos this fifth day of April, Era of one thousand three hundred and twenty-one years [1283]. I, Infante Don Sancho, wrote my name with my own hand.

59. Peñafiel, 4 December 1283. Infante Manuel issues a document ­ceding control of a house he had recently acquired from his nephew in Villacienzo to the nearby Hospital del Rey in Burgos. In Rodríguez López, El Real Monasterio de Las Huelgas de Burgos y el Hospital del Rey, doc. 116 (1.328); my translation. Sepan quantos esta carta uieren como yo Infante Don Manuel fiio del Rey ­Fernando otorgo et uengo reconosçudo que la casa del ospital de Burgos que es en uilla ençienso que me dio el Infante Don Sancho que despues de mios dias que finque libre e quita al hospital. Et por que esto non uenga en dubda mande seellar esta carta con mio seello. Dada en Penna fiel quatro dias de deciembre Era de Mill et treçientos et ueinte et un anno. Yo Rodriguez yuanez la escriui por mandado de Don Manuel. Let all who read this charter know that I, Infante Don Manuel, son of King Fernando, authorize and acknowledge that the house in Villacienzo belonging to the Hospital del Rey in Burgos which was given to me by Infante Don ­Sancho is bequeathed free and clear after my death to the Hospital del Rey. And that there may be no doubt in this regard, I commanded that my seal be affixed to this charter. Given in Peñafiel on the fourth day of December, in the Era of one thousand three hundred and twenty-one [1283]. I, Rodríguez Ybañez, wrote this by order of Don Manuel.

60.  Peñafiel, 25 December 1283. Infante Manuel dictates his last will and testament. In Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 35 (139–44). Aquest es translat del testament del infante don Manuel et cetera. Este es traslado bien et fielmente sacado letra por letra del testamento del infante don Manuel, fecho en esta guisa: En el nombre de Dios Padre, et Fijo et Spiritu Sancto amen. Yo infante don Manuel, fijo del rey don Ferrando et de la Regina donna Beatriz, con buena memoria et con sana volontat, fago et ordeno mi testamento en esta guisa: Primeramente, pongo facienda de mio cuerpo et ordinamiento de mi alma en el muy noble mio señor et mio sobrino infante don Sancho et fago mios manomessors a la condessa donna Beatris, mi mujer, et a Johan Peres, tesorero de Murcia, mio notario, et a frey Rodrigo de Burgos, guardian de Pennafiel et a Johan Sances de Ayala, mio mayordomo, et a Martin Ferrandes Pantoia, ayo de mio fijo don Johan, et a Martin Alvarez de Ferrera, et a Alonso Garcia et a Johan Breton, mios cavalleros, a estos doles nostro poder todo en uno de veer et de



Documentary Appendix

345

guardar con concejo et cum mando de don Sancho, la fazienda de mi muger et de mio fijo don Johan que d’estos reziban, et fagan todas las rentas et todos los derechos, tambien de los mios hereditamentos como de las tierras et de todo lo al que yo tengo del infante don Sancho, que ayan poder de lo e guardelo partir assi como será escripto en esta carta. Primeramente, mando que todas quantas debdas fueren falladas en verdat que yo deva con cartas, o todas fuerças o tuertos que yo oviese fecho que sea pagado todo de lo mio. Mando a la condessa, mi muger, que aya todas las rentas, e los derechos de Escalona, et de sus aldeas et de sus terminos. Et sobresto quel cumplan de las mias rentas de Elche con su almoxarifago a tantos maravedis como ella avia de las rentas de Elda et de Novella, et si las rentas de Elche non conpliessen a todo esto que sea complido de las rentas de los otros mios heredamientos, et esto que lo ayan por en toda su vida, et si por alguna razon quisiesse ella mas los quatro mille marcos de plata quel atorgue por la donación del casamiento, et mille sietezientas libras de tornesos que me presto quando case con ella, que ge lo den de los mios bienes, et que dexe estos bienes a mio fijo don Johan, et fata que esta fuere pagada d’estos marcos, et d’estas libras quel non sea contado en la debda lo que recebiesse de Escalona et de Elche. Mando a dona Yolant, mia fija, et de la infanta donna Costança, que aya Elda et Novella con todas sus rentas, et con todos sus derechos, et con todas sus pertenencias et con sus castiellos por juro de heredat por siempre jamas, et en esto la fago heredera et dagelo, en tal manera que ella e todos aquellos que d’ella venieren que estos logares ovieren de heredar que nunca sean, nin veyan con poder d’estos legatos contra mio fijo don Johan, myo heredero mayor, nin contra aquellos que del venieren que herederon el segnorio de Elche, et de Villena et de los otros logares que yo e en el regno de Murcia; et que estos logares de Elda et de Novella, con sus castiellos non los puedan dar nin vender, nin enagenar a orden ni a om de religión, ni a otro ninguno que sea de fuera del señorio de los regnos de Castiella et de tierra de Murcia, nin a omen que sea mas poderoso que don Johan, mio fijo, o de los que del venieren que fueren sus herederos de aquello que lo hereden de mi en tierra de Murcia. Et si por aventura, mia fija donna Yolante et los que d’ella viniessen que heredassen estos logares los quesiessen vender, que los non podan, si non a mio fijo don Johan o a sus herederos queriendolo ellos comprar, dando por ellos precio comunal assi como dessen por ello, et que las alzadas de los pleytos d’estos logares que las aya a Elche, assi commo agora las an; et que la justicia d’estos logares que la aya mio fijo don Johan et los que del vinieren, et que les fagan d’ellos guerra et paz quando ge lo mandara. Et d’esto que faga mia fija dona Yolant et sus herederos, que estos logares heredero pleyto et omenage con su carta, et que ganno d’ello aseguramiento de don Sancho et de los que heredaran los regnos de Castiella et de Murcia de lo cumplir assi. Et si donna Yolant o sus herederos, esto no quisieren fazer, mando

346

Documentary Appendix

que mio fijo don Johan et sus herederos tenga Elda et Novelda con sus castiellos, et que recuden a mia fija donna Yolante et a sus herederos con todas las rentas d’estos logares, sacado lo que costaren la retenença de los castillos que son siete mille maravedís de los blancos de la primera guerra. Et si por aventura fallesesse el linaje de dona Yolante, que tornen estos logares a don Johan, mio fijo, o a sus herederos, et si falliziesse el linaje de don Johan, que torne todo a los herederos de donna Yolante. Otrosi, mando que mia fija donna Yolante aya en sua vida la martiniega de Penafiel et la bodega con sus derechos, pero que ayan los freyres descalzos del logar el pan que les yo senale e los molinos, cada semana una carga et otorgo ge lo que lo ayan por siempre. Et que don Johan, mio fijo, aya el segnorio todo de Penafiel, et la justicia con sus calonnas et con sus derechos. Fago heredero a don Johan, mio fijo, de todo lo otro quanto yo he, moble et rayz, et dol et otorgol el sennorio entregamiente en todo. Comendo mi cuerpo que sea enterrado en Ucles con la infante donna Costança, mi muger, et con nostro fijo don Alfonso, et que fagan las sepulturas mucho apuestas et muy buenas. Mando y con mio cuerpo a la orden de Sanctiago çinquanta millle maravedís, et que estos masmessores con el maestre et con el prior de Ucles, tomen d’ellos veynte mille maravedís por a fazer la capiella mayor, do es el enterramiento de nostros cuerpos et que non nos camien de aquel logar. Otrosi, que tomen ende mas diez mille maravedís et que compren dellos heredamiento en termino de Ucles, pora soldada de seys capellanos que canten missas siempre por nostras almas et de nostro linage, et de los veynte mille maravedís que fincan que compren heredamiento pora la orden et quel conviento de Ucles, los clericos con los otros fagan cadanno aniversario por nos otro dia de Sanctiago, et que ayan aquel dia pora pietanza zient et cinquanta maravedís, et que se cumpla siempre de la rienta del heretamiento que fuere comprado por estos veynte mille maravedís. Otrosi, mando que la casa del refetori, que mande fazer en Burgos en casa de los Discalzos que se cumpla. Otrosi, mando que la casa de la enfermeria de los Discalzos de Pennafiel que la fagan fazer luego. Otrosi, mando que la casa que e comenzada a fazer en Murcia para los predicadores, que la agaben et que les den mas dos mille maravedís porque ruegen a Dios por mi alma. Otrosi, mando pora la eglesia que yo mande fazer en Murcia para los freyres Descalzos, que les den tres mille maravedís. Mando a Ferrand Manuel, mio fijo, diez mille maravedís. Mando a Henrrique, mio fijo, diez mille maravedís, et a Blanca, mia fija, para su casamiento diez mille maravedís. Et a Sancho, mio fijo, zinco mille maravedís.



Documentary Appendix

347

Mando que partan a mios criados diez mille maravedís. Mando a Ferrant Peres Ennamorado et a su mujer donna Maria, que ayan en toda su vida salinas que tienen de mi, et lo de Ceniziento que lo ayan segunt dize la carta que tienen de mi et mandoles dos mille maravedís. Mando para la lavor de Santa Maria de Sevilla dos mille maravedís. Mando pora partir a monesterios de las ordenes pobres ocho mille maravedís. Mando pora casamyentos de guerfanas et pora partir a pobres, ocho mille maravedís. Mando a los escuderos, que me serviren antano en tierra de Murcia, que doni a cada un ochoçientos maravedís, et que servan y tres meses, et todos estos maravedís que yo mando son de los blancos de la primera guerra. Tengo por bien et mando, que la condesa, mi muger, con estos masmesores, ayan en guarda a mi fijo don Johan con todo quantal yo dexo que le seriervan, et quel guardien a el et a tudas las sus cosas, axi commo fijo d’ellos et que lo fagan con conseio de don Sancho. E mando que los que tienen castiellos de mi que recuden con ellos a mi fijo don Johan, con concejo et con atorgamiento de su madre et de sus masmessores, et si alguns quesieren dixer d’estos castiellos, que los dexen en mano de mi muger et d’estos masmessores para mi fijo don Johan, et si mi muger et estos masmessores demandaren castiellos a los que los tienen de mi, que los recaden con ellos por mi fijo don Johan et esto que sea en poder de lo fazer la condessa, con todos los masmessores o con partit d’ellos, et faciéndolos en esta guisa de por quitos a los que tenien castillos de mi. Et mio fijo don Johan, con su madre et con los monseseres recudan a nostro sennor don Sancho, quando ello quisiere, con los castiellos que yo del tenia o que los tenga de su mano, a su mandamiento de don Sancho et quel sirva con todos los otros castiellos que de mi hereda, et quel faga d’ellos guerra et paz, et quel sirva con el cuerpo et con los castiellos et con todo quanto de mi ha commo vassallo a segnor. Et quiero, et mando et otorgo, que de todos quantos bienes yo dexe, tambien heredamientos como muebles, et las tierras et quanto tengo de don Sancho, que saccado lo que dexe a la condessa assi commo sopredicho es, quel deve todo fincar en salvo, que de todo lo oltro que y fuere non pueda tomar heredero mio, ni oltro ninguno tomar ninguna cosa d’ello si non pora quitar las mias debdas, e pora complir estas mias mandas, saccado las espensas que se dovien fazer, et las tenenzas de los castiellos, et los lavores que fueren mister, et las soldadas de los vasallos e todo lo otro que lo metan en las debdas et en las mandas que yo dexo fata que sea todo complido. Et defiendo firmemente que ningun mio heredero no sea usado de venir contra este mio testamento, ni d’ello crebantar en ninguna cosa, et qualquier que lo ficiese aya la ira de Dios, et la mia maldicion et pierda quanto de mi dovia hereditar. Sobretudo esto pongo a mio segnor et mio sobrino don Sancho por

348

Documentary Appendix

guardador et defendidor de la mi fazienda del cuerpo, et del alma, et de la condessa, mi muger et de don Johan, mio fijo su creado que el tomo para criar et levar bien, et ruegol et pido por merced, por los servicios et las ajudas que yo fuiz en levarle su facienda a bien quanto yo put et sope et senalalment porque despues de la muerte de don Ferrando, su hermano, punne que todos los que somos naturales de los regnos de su padre, conoscessemos et otorgassemos a el por heredero en todo et por nostro sennor natural, et ay del a mantenir en ello, et por muchos otros servicios et aguardimentos quel fiz, et por la gran fiuza que ovi sempre en ell que la terra e todo lo al que yo tovia del, que lo de et que lo otorge a su criado, mio fijo don Johan, porque aya los vassallos et lo que yo avia, con quel sirva muy bien et la mi alma sea quita de las debdas, et que faga el tener et complir todo este assi como sobredicho es en este mio testamento. Este es uno testamento, mi manda, mi voluntat postremera et si otros testamentos paresicesen de mi, yo los rivoco et quiero que esto vala, en esto otorgo et confirmo. Et porque este sea firme et non venga en dutda, mande seellar este testamento con mio seello, et rogue a estos que aquí sean dichos que fuesen mis ­testigos et puesessen en este testamento algunos de los sus seellos en testimonio: el abad de Santgerin inposo y su seello, e el convent de los freyres descalzos de Penafiel pueseron y su seello, Diego Lopes de Mendoza puso y sun seello, Sancho Sanches de Mazuolo, Alfonso Roderigues Tello, Alvar Diaz de Ferrera, Guillem Ferrandes, Ferrando Ruys Damaza, Sancho Ruys de Monesteruele, Nicolas Peres, Ximen Lops. Fecho este testamento en Penafiel, veynte días de decembre, Era de mille et trezientos et veynte et uno anno. Yo Johan Peres, tesorero de Murcia et notario dello infante don Manuel, fuy presente a todas estas cosas sopradichas, a mandamiento de mio sennor,  el ­sobredicho don Manuel, fesi escribir este testamento e so scriure com mi manu en el testimonio. Yo Diago Martines, escribano publico en Huepte por el infante don S ­ ancho, vi el testamento de nostro sennor el infante don Manuel, fecho en esta forma segund que sus es seellado con el seello del dicho sennor, et del abbat de ­Santg[erin], et del convent de los frayles descalços de Penafiel et de Gomes Fer[nandez], et fiz escribir este translado et fiz en él mio signo en testimonio.

61.  Elche, 23 January 1284. The town council of Elche sends envoys to Infante Manuel’s widow, Doña Beatrice, to ascertain the contents of his will. In Cabanes Catalá, Codèx d’Elx, doc. 34 (138). Sepan quantos esta vieren como nos el concejo de Elche, por razon de la morte de nostro sennor el infante don Manuel, que Dios perdone, en que nos toviamos muy grand mengua et muy grand quebanto, oviemos nostro acordo generalmiente todos en uno que sopiessemos a qui nos acomando nostro senor don



Documentary Appendix

349

Manuel, o a qui nos dexo por heredero et por sennor, e sobre esto escogemos por nostros mandaderos et por nostros ciertos et speciales procuradores a Pero Martines de Jovera et a Pere Yvannes, nuestros vezinos, los quales enbiamos et mandamus que sepan verdat, por quantas partes podieren, a qui avemos de recebir por sennor et a recodir con la villa de Elche.

62. Huete, 8 February 1284. Countess Doña Beatrice responds to a ­request by the town council of Elche. In Cabanes Catalá, Codèx d’Elx, doc. 32 (135–6). Sepades que Pero Martines de Jovera et Per Yvannes, vuestros mandaderos et vuestros procuradores, legaron a nos a Hueyt, el lunes treynta et un dia de enere, et dieronnos las vuestras cartas en que nos enbiastes decir que sopiessen en verdat a quien vos acomendara nostro sennor don Manuel ... Et porque estos vuestros mandaderos fuesen certos del derecho et de la verdat, mostramosles el testamento de nostro sennor el infante don Manuel, en que dexo por heredero mayor et por nostro sennor a mi don Johan, su fijo; et ellos ... rezibieronme por nostro sennor, et fizieronme omenage por vos de me rendir con la villa de Elche et con todos mios derechos et mio senorio.

Abbreviations

AM AHN ACA ANTT BNM CAX CODOM CSIC DA DAAX DIAX DRAE MGH SS MHE PCG

Archivo Municipal Archivo Histórico Nacional, Madrid Archivo de la Corona de Aragón, Barcelona Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo, Lisbon Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid Crónica de Alfonso X Colección de documentos para la historia del reino de Murcia Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas Documentary Appendix Diplomatario andaluz de Alfonso X Documentación e itinerario de Alfonso X el Sabio Diccionario de la lengua de la Real Academia Española Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores Memorial histórico español Primera crónica general

Notes

Introduction 1 Lomax, “El padre,” 163, 172–3, 176. 2 For a discussion of the origin and meaning of Alhofra, see Pretel Marín, Historia de Villena hasta el siglo XVII, 311, n. 353; and especially a recent ­article by the same author, “Entre el cuento y la historia: Origen del ­Estado colchón de don Manuel.” 1. The Early Years: 1234–52 1 In the third part of the Libro de las armas (hereinafter “Armas”) Juan ­Manuel recalls that he travelled to Madrid to meet with his cousin, ­Sancho IV, where he lay dying, “et fallelo en Madrid, et posaua en las casas de las duennas de vuestra orden” (1.136). Sancho IV resided in Madrid and held court in the Dominican convent of Santo Domingo, where he was cared for by the sisters, from the end of January 1295 until his departure for Toledo in late March, so we know that Fray Juan was a Dominican. See Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 2.366. This is the same Fray Juan Alfonso, “nuestro amigo,” at whose request Juan Manuel composed a treatise concerning “la manera del amor et commo las gentes se aman vnas a otras” in the Libro enfenido, 1.182–9. All references to the works of Juan Manuel are taken from Blecua, ed., Obras completas. All translations to English from the Old Spanish text are my own. 2 See Díez de Revenga, “El ‘Libro de las armas’ de don Juan Manuel,” 103–16, and Deyermond, “Cuentos orales y estructura formal,” 75–87. 3 “Et quando fue conplido el tienpo en que la reyna ovo a encaescer fue en Carrion” (1.122). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 237, accepts this account, but ­Lomax, “Padre,” 164, does not, asserting that the major convents of Carrión, San Zoilo, and Santa María have no record of either his birth or baptism.

354

Notes to pages 3–4

4 See Documentary Appendix (DA), doc. 1. 5 For a detailed account of the members of the king’s immediate h ­ ousehold and the major ecclesiastical figures of his reign at that time, see González, Fernando III, “Casa del rey,” 1.118–23, and “Iglesia: ­Obispos,” 1.201–6. 6 See the king’s itinerary established by González, Fernando III, “Indice de documentos reales,” 3.447–532 and here 3.494. 7 “[E]t venit Carrionem, ubi mater occurrit ei; et ibidem moram longam fecerat uxor eius” in Chronica latina, chap. 62 (105); also see the king’s itinerary established by González, Fernando III, “Indice de documentos reales,” 3.447–532 and here 3.494. 8 “Confluxit ad eamdem ciuitatem maxima hominum multitudo populorum et nobilium tam de Castella quam de Gallecia et de aliis partibus regni, ubi logam protaxit moram rex, expediendo negocia ­multiformia cum consilio bonorum uirorum ... [S]equenti uero hyeme sub era ­MCCLXXI, in festo Epiphanie, obsedit dominus rex Vbedam” in Chronica latina, chaps. 63–4 (105). 9 “[P]ost festum Sancti Michaelis proximum sequens, existentibus Burgis rege et regina, matre sua” in Chronica latina, chap. 65 (107); the monarch confirmed a privilege in Burgos on 15 October, in González, Fernando III, 3.501. 10 González, Fernando III, 3.501. 11 “que dicitur Paredes, que est inter Palenciam et Carrionem” in Chronica latina, chap. 65 (107). 12 “Sed Aluarus Petri, usus consilio saniori, supposuit se uoluntati et dispositioni reginarum domine Berengarie et domine Beatricis ... Acta sunt ista in uilla, que dicitur Palenciola, circa festum Purificationis” in Chronica latina, chap. 66 (107–8). 13 “Post uere proximo, quod fuit sub anno gratie MCCXXXV, ... rex reuersus est Toletum ad matrem et uxorem” in Chronica latina, chap. 67 (108–9). 14 Document cited by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 193, who, however, conjectures Felipe may have been born in Sahagún. 15 On 15 March 1281 Infante Manuel confirmed a document in Tardajos, Burgos, in which he refers to “donna Hurraca et Marina García, ffijas de donna Toda, mi ama” in AM de Burgos, Ms. HI-2691, published in González Díez, Colección diplomática del Consejo de Burgos, doc. 109 (196–7). 16 “Alfonso García, vn cauallero que me crio, ... et se criara con mio padre et era su hermano de leche” in Armas, 1:122. According to Pellicer, Casa de Sarmiento de Villamayor, 46, Alfonso García was married to his first cousin, Leonor, illegitimate daughter of Infante Manuel’s uncle, Infante Alfonso de Molina, and Teresa Pérez de Braganza, whose children Juan Fernández and Mayor Alfonso were Infante Manuel’s cousins. 17 See Serrano, “El ayo de Alfonso el Sabio.”



Notes to pages 4–6

355

18 The family, its history and genealogy, are documented in Serrano, “El mayordomo mayor de Doña Berenguela,” 113–30 et passim. See also González, Fernando III, 1.151–5. 19 “[S]onnara que por aquella criatura, et por su linage, avia a ser vengada la muerte de Ihesu Christo, ... et oy decir que dixera el rey quel pareçia este suenno muy contrario del que ella sonnara quando estaua en çinta del rey don Alfonso, su fijo” (1:122). 20 In this context, we cite Leonardo Funes, “La blasfemia del Rey Sabio (I–II),” who provides an edition and the most comprehensive investigation of this complex legend to date; see also an excellent summary of the legend and its history in González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 448–55. 21 See Funes, “La blasfemia,” 58–62. 22 In the first volume of his edition of the Castilian translation of the Crónica Geral de Espanha de 1344, which, however, does not extend as far as the legend referred to here, Diego Catalán remarks that “[l]a más llamativa singularidad de la nueva Crónica Geral de Espanha es su hostilidad sistemática a la dinastía castellana” (xxvii). 23 See Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 61 et passim; Craddock, “Dynasty in Dispute,” 202; and O’Callaghan, Learned King, 3 et passim. 24 See González Jiménez, ed., Crónica de Alfonso X. Según el Ms. II/2777 de la Biblioteca del Palacio Real. Madrid, xiii–xiv. All references to this work, hereinafter cited as CAX, are from this edition. 25 Lindley Cintra, ed., Crónica Geral de Espanha de 1344, 1.150–1. 26 “[A]via ya muy grant tiempo et muchos annos que non se fiziera en çinta nin encaeciera” (1.122). 27 “[E]t acaeçio que era y connellos el obispo de Sogouia, que avia nonbre don Remon, que fue después arzobispo de Seuilla” (1.123). 28 “Et el obispo, sabiendo el suen[n]o que la reyna sonnara por voluntad de Dios, dixo al rey et a la reyna que si por bien touiesen, que era bien de [le] poner no[n]bre que fiziese a lo que daua a entender aquel suenno. Et por ende quel pusiesen nonbre Manuel, en que a dos cosas: la vna, [que] es vno de los nombres de Dios; la otra, que Manuel quiere decir ‘Dios ­conusco.’ Pues dase a entender que si tanto bien avia de venir en la cristiandad et en la nasçencia deste infante, que era poder del nonbre de Dios, et que Dios era conusco” (1.123). In the Libro de los estados (1.278), Juan Manuel’s fictional character, Julio, baptizes the pagan king Morabán with the Christian name “Manuel” for precisely the same reasons. 29 See Diccionario de Historia Eclesiástica de España, 4.2400, 2457; Ballesteros, “Don Remondo,” 313–18. 30 As royal notary and bishop of Segovia, Remondo received from ­Fernando III extensive properties in Seville in 1251–52 in recognition of his service; see González, Fernando III, docs. 812 (3.391–3), 813 (3.393–4),

356

31

32 33

34

35

Notes to pages 6–7 and 840 (3.424–5). He remained faithful to Alfonso throughout his entire reign and in 1284 was appointed an executor of the king’s last will and testament; MHE, doc. 229 (2:122–34). Ballesteros, Alfonso X: “No creemos muy acertada la explicación del famoso prosista y sus razones las estimamos especiosas. Justificada sí encontramos la fantasía para rodear el nacimiento de su linaje de favores y recuerdos sobrenaturales” (237). Lomax, “Padre,” wrote: “En resumen, esta historieta de Juan Manuel suena a algunos de los cuentos seudo-históricos del Conde Lucanor” (164). For a comprehensive history of his reign, see Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos. The relationship between the royal houses of Castile and Constantinople was well known, and the Chronica latina regum castellae makes a pointed reference to the fact: “Dictus autem Ysaac imperator fuit auus domine nostre regine Beatricis, pater scilicet matris eius” (chap. 30, p. 71). Lomax, “Padre,” 165–6, believes that Infante Manuel was named after this uncle and not the Emperor Manuel I, while conceding that Manuel Angelos was a relatively obscure figure of whom we know little and who probably died about 1212 when Beatrice was only fourteen. Lomax argues that “[a]lgunos historiadores han sugerido que el nombre haya procedido de éste [Manuel Komnenos], sin reparar en la usurpación del trono por parte de Isaac y en la enemistad de las dos familias” (165). While this observation is accurate, it does not take into account the ­mythical dimensions achieved by Manuel after his death and particularly around the time of Infante Manuel’s birth in 1234. Ballesteros partially reflects this myth when he states: “Ascendiente del abuelo de la reina de Castilla era el nombrado emperador Manuel Comneno, tan valeroso como pérfido, inmortalizado por Dante en la frase poética il greco imperator fallace” (Alfonso X, 257). Manuel was famous for his valour but he was never cited by Dante as “perfidious.” The citation is, instead, taken from Torquato Tasso’s Gerusalemme liberata, canto I, st. 69, the poetic history of the Christian army led by Godfrey of Bouillon during the last months of the First Crusade, and refers to Manuel’s grandfather, Alexios I ­Komnenos, who persuaded Pope Urban II to launch the First Crusade in 1096 when the Byzantine Empire was under attack by the Seljuk Turks. Alexios, however, failed to support the crusaders in their efforts to ­capture Jerusalem, and thus Tasso’s pejorative reference to him as ­“fallace,” or false. “Balduinus Imperator Constantinopolitanus de expugnata secundo urbe Constantinopoli,” in Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, 18.520–3.



Notes to pages 8–10

357

36 The papal bull “Cum mater Ecclesia” is published in Auvray, Registres de Grégoire IX, 1.2360–73, and BNM, Nacional MSS 18730–75; see also Goñi Gaztambide, Historia de la bula de la cruzada en España, 170, n. 151. 37 All references to this work are from the edition of F. Soldevila (2007). 38 See Vajay, “Eudoquía Cómnena,” and Hecht, “Zur Geschichte der ‘Kaiserin’ von Montpellier.” 39 See Harvey, “The Empress Eudoxia and the Troubadours.” 40 Cantiga 342.11–13: “Porend’ en Costantinópla / aveo, com’ aprendí, / que Don Manüél, o bõo / Emperador, mandou i / fazer eigreja mui n ­ óbre,” in Cantigas de Santa Maria, ed. Mettmann, 2:236–7. His son, ­Alexios II, is cited in Cantiga 131.7–9: “Est’ emperador nom’ aví’ Aleixí, / de Costantinóbre, per com’ aprendí, / e sa mollér Jordana, segund’ oí.” According to a contemporary legend recorded by Jacopo da Acqui in the fourteenth-century Chronicon imaginis mundi (3.1539), Alexios II was m ­ arried to Jordana, ­sister of Renier of Montferrat, who had m ­ arried ­Alexios’s sister, ­Maria. Renier was, then, the son-in-law of Manuel I. Fatheringham, Marco Sanudo, ­remarks that “Jordana probably had no existence, and she was certainly not the wife of the Emperor Alexius” (30, n. 3). 41 Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos, 8. 42 Goñi Gaztambide, Historia de la bula de la cruzada, writes: “Invitó a todos los monarcas y obispos de la Península a colaborar con el emperador en la cuestión de Oriente ... Y, conocedor del corazón humano, cursó la misma invitación a la reina de Castilla y León” (170). 43 Three contemporary sources give different dates: Lucas de Tuy, ­Chronicon mundi (1236), says: “Era M.CC.LXX.III [1235] regina domina Beatriz obiit et supulta est Burgis in regali cimiterio” (IV.101.340); Jiménez de Rada, De rebus Hispanie (1240), says: “Era MCCLXXII [1234] obiit regina Beatrix in oppido quod Taurum dicitur, et ducta ad regale ­monasterium prope ­Burgis iuxta regem Henricum regaliter est sepulta” (VIIII.xv.297); the E ­ storia de España (c. 1270) says “enla era de mill & dozientos & ­setenta & tres annos & andaua el anno dela encarnacion del senor en mill & ­dozientos & treynta & tres & ese anno morio la Reyna dona ­beatriz enla uilla de toro & adoxieron la al monesterio delas huelgas de Burgos a ­enterrar & enterraron la Real miente & en Real onrra cerca del Rey don enrrique” in PCG, chap. 1045 (729). The date 5 November 1235 is ­provided by Flórez, Memorias de las reynas cathólicas, who affirms that “un antiguo calendario de Burgos nota al margen del día 5 de noviembre la muerte en aquel día y era 1273” (1.572–3). Flórez also asserts that the date, 1235, is confirmed by a document from the church of Mataplana (Campos), which Beatrice began to build in 1228, citing as his source Manrique, Cisterciencium seu verius ecclesiasticorum annalium, 3.14 (1.572).

358

Notes to pages 10–11

44 There has always existed some confusion in this regard, but our best ­evidence now points to the following children: Alfonso (1221–84), F ­ adrique (1223–77), Fernando (1225–43), Leonor (1226?-30?), Berenguela (1228–87), Enrique (1230–1303), Felipe (1231–74), Sancho (1233–61), M ­ anuel (1234–83), and María (1235). Jiménez de Rada places Leonor before Berenguela and remarks “decessit paruula” (De rebus Hispanie, 9.12.292). Lucas de Tuy, Chronicon mundi, is our source for the third d ­ aughter, María, whom he says died a few days before her mother: “Ante paucos dies decesserat filia regis Fernandi et regine Beatricis Maria p ­ uellula, que Legione in monasterio Sancti Ysidori est sepulta” (IV.101.340). See also Flórez, Reinas, “Hijos de la reina Doña Beatriz” (1.558–65). 45 Cantigas 122, 256, and 292. 46 “Et por que entonçe non era constunbre de criar los fijos de los reys con tan grant locura nin con tan grant hufana commo agora, touiendo que las grandes costas que las deuian poner en seruiçio de Dios et en ­acrecentamiento de la sancta fe et del reyno, et que lo que se podia ­escusar de la costa que lo deuian guardar para esto, criauan sus fijos guardando la salud de sus cuerpos lo mas simple mente que podian; asi que luego que los podian sacar de aquel lugar que nascian, luego los dauan a alguno que los criase en su casa. Et por esta manera dio este infante don Manuel a don Pero Lopez de Ayala et el criolo en Panpliga et en el ­Viallalmunno, que es agora yerma, et en Mayamud, et en esos lugares de Can de Mundo, do avia el grant algo. Et desque el infante fue ya creciendo, et el rey touo por bien que estudiese en su casa, estudo en casa del rey, su padre, vn grant tiempo” (Armas, 1.123–4). 47 Ballesteros cites a 1238 document he discovered referring to Juan Marcos, Enrique’s ayo, and that Enrique was probably raised in Villaquirán de los Infantes (Alfonso X, 108). 48 Rodríguez López, Real Monasterio de Las Huelgas , doc. 75, 1.441; mentioned by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 108, without citing his source. Juan M ­ arcos was rewarded for his service to Infante Enrique in the R ­ epartimiento de Sevilla, 2.165, 259. 49 Jiménez de Rada, De rebus Hispanie, VIIII.xii.292. 50 The archbishop relates that “Philipum, qui oblatus a domina Berengaria ­regina nobili auia sua Deo et Roderico Toletano pontifici per manus ­eiusdem pontificis ad titulum ecclesie Toletane in sortem Domini est ­uocatus; et in continenti idem pontifex prebendam et alia beneficia in predicta e­ cclesia assignauit; ... Sancium, quem oblatum Roderico ­Toletano pontifici, a quo cum clericali tonsura psalmiste officium est adeptus et prebendam et beneficium in Toletana ecclesia consequtus” (Jiménez de Rada, De rebus Hispanie, VIIII.xii.292).



Notes to pages 11–12

359

51 Jiménez de Rada, De rebus Hispanie, VIIII.xii.292; Estoria de España, in PCG, chap. 1036 (720), chap. 1062 (742); Rodríguez López, Real Monasterio de las Huelgas, 1.136, 169. 52 See Salazar y Castro, Casa de Haro, 255–60. See also Torres Fontes, “Relación murciana de los López de Ayala.” 53 Manuel’s last will and testament, written five days before his death on 25 December 1283, cites “Johan Sanchez de Ayala, mio mayordomo;” see Torres Fontes, “El testamento del infante don Manuel” (16). 54 He refers to himself by this title in a document dated 26 June 1289 (Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, 223), and Juan Manuel recalls that “Iohan Sanchis de Ayala, mio mayordomo” was with him during the ­interview he held with Sancho IV when the latter was on his deathbed (Armas,1.136). The last document he confirms as mayordomo is dated 31 July 1306 in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, 339. 55 Montalbanejo, 6 April 1303 in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 50 (267). 56 González, Fernando III, 1.130. 57 Repartimiento de Sevilla, 1.29, 44, 89, 136, 181, 202–3, 227, 261, 265, 323; González, Fernando III, 1.133–6. 58 González, Fernando III, doc. 494 (2.569–70): “facio cartam donationis ... uobis domno Petro Lupi et uxori uestre domne Agnes, filiis et filiabus uestris, ­totique successiori uestre perpetuo ualituram” (570). 59 Salazar y Castro, Casa de Haro, 259. 60 González, Fernando III, docs. 609–10 (3.136–40). 61 “Afirma también don Pablo de Espinosa que fue don Pedro López Señor de la Casa de Mena y Pertiguero Mayor de la Iglesia de Santiago. Pero este empleo nos repugna, porque siendo pertiguero lo mismo que defensor de aquella Iglesia, y protector de sus muchos vasallos, en quien ejercía jurisdicción, es notable que fuese la Iglesia Compostelana a buscar en Cantabria un Caballero tan distante para darle aquella dignidad ... Sin ­embargo, puede ser que, como el Pertiguero Mayor era también General de las tropas con que la Iglesia de Santiago servía en la guerra de los infieles, se diese este título a don Pedro López de Ayala, para que las mandase en ella” (de Espinosa, Historia de Sevilla, pt. 2, bk. 5, fol. 7, cited by Salazar y Castro, Casa de Haro, 257–8). 62 AM de Palencia, Escrit. 35, núm. 26, cited by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 57 and 87, n. 8. 63 From L. argenteata, an agrarian measure used for vineyards and fields of oats or barley equal to about 4,462 square metres or about 1.1 acres; see Menéndez Pidal, Orígenes del español, §49.1 (270–1). 64 From L. jugum, “yoke,” referring to a team of two oxen and ­originally the amount of land that could be plowed in one day by the team;

360

65

66 67 68 69

70

71

72

73

Notes to pages 12–14 about 32.198 hectares or about 79.56 acres. See Corominas, Diccionario crítico etimológico, s.v. “yugo.” Ortiz de Zúñiga, Anales de Sevilla, 2.65; de Espinosa, Historia de Sevilla, pt. 2, bk. 5, fol. 7, cited in Salazar y Castro, Casa de Lara, 258. In the R ­ epartimiento de Sevilla, ed. González, we find “A don Pedro López de ­Ayala cien arancadas, e diez yugadas en Nublas” (2.46, 239). The “don Lope” referred to in the Repartimiento, 2.46 and 2.239, could be either the young son of Diego López de Haro, Lope Díaz, or Lope Pérez, elected bishop of Córdoba on 5 March 1252; both were known simply as “Don Lope.” Salazar, Casa de Haro, 254–5. In Menéndez Pidal, ed., PCG, chap. 1046 (731). Libro de la caza, 1.520, 526. “Collera, a que puso nombre el rey el Aldea de los Falconeros del rey; ... e es de término de Aznalcazar; ... A Pero López veinte arançadas e quatro yugadas” in Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.91–2, 248. Ed. Fradejas Rueda; see also the extensive collection of hunting texts from the Middle Ages up to 1800 edited by Fradejas Rueda, Textos clásicos de cetrería. AHN, Silos, A.XLIII.3, in Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Silos, doc. 136 (189–90): “Facta carta, mense augusti, in era millesima CCLXXXIII, regnante el rey don Fernando en Castiella e en Toledo e en Leon e en Galizia [e en] Cordova e en Murcia, con su madre la reyna dona Berenguella, e con so mugier dona Juana, e con don Alfonso so fijo, e con don Frederic e con don Anric e con don Phylip e con don Sancho e con don Hemanuel ermanos” (190). Neither Ballesteros nor Lomax records this particular charter. “Actum est hoc in exercitu Sibelle Mense marcii ... Testes huius rei sunt dompnus Hemanuel, filius domini Regis ...” The text, originally in B ­ urgos, Gumiel de Izán, Leg. 135–5–2, and now in AHN, Gumiel, carp. 231, núm. 17, was first published by Sánchez Albornoz, “Algunos documentos”; rpt. Sánchez Albornoz, Viejos y nuevos estudios sobre las instituciones medievales españolas, 3.1779–81, doc. 12. González, Fernando III, 1.380, n. 545, mentions the document, as does Lomax, “Padre,” 166, n. 5, who mistakenly gives the document number as 18 and the date as May 1248. I believe that the eight statues located above the main entrance to the ­Burgos Cathedral, known as the Portada de Santa María and traditionally referred to as the “Galería de los Reyes,” represent the children of Fernando III and Beatrice of Swabia in 1249, the year of the royal c­ ouple’s thirtieth wedding anniversary. Though the effigies were completed around 1250 during the reign of Fernando III, they were probably not placed in the gallery until after 1260, the year in which the cathedral was consecrated, and then by order of King Alfonso X, who had by that date ordered the creation of eight similar but smaller statues of himself and his



Notes to pages 14–16

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86

361

brothers and sister, Berenguela, found in two groupings of four located on the northwest and southeast corners of the upper cloister of the cathedral. Over the years, there has been a great deal of speculation concerning the identity of the eight gallery and cloister figures, none of it supported by any hard evidence, and I am currently writing an ­extensive article dealing with the attribution issue. At this time, the most a­ uthoritative works on the subject are Deknatel, “Thirteenth Century Gothic ­Sculpture” (1935); Karge, Die Kathedrale von Burgos (1989); and Abegg, Königs- und B ­ ischofsmonumente (1999), whose research effectively summarizes and analyses nearly all of the previous studies and constitutes the most detailed and authoritative work to date concerning the statues, their creation, and their identity. I am convinced that the eight effigies in the Gallery of the Kings represent, in order of their succession to the throne, Alfonso, Fadrique, Fernando, Enrique, Felipe, Sancho, B ­ erenguela, and Manuel. The first of the effigies represents Alfonso with a branch of lilies in the crook of his right arm (Fig. 9) corresponding to the monarch’s own description of the mythological Sun as a young man with a branch of flowers in his right hand “just as the Emperors when they are crowned;” see Libro de los juegos, fol. 95v, Libros de ajedrez, dados y tablas in Prose Works of Alfonso X el Sabio (1997). The lilies, of course, are the floral e­ mblem of the Virgin Mary, to whom the king had dedicated himself since ­childhood. The last of the eight statues, a young man of about f­ ourteen years of age, is probably Infante Manuel and depicts him holding a small dog in his arms, emblematic of his devotion and loyalty (Fig. 7). de la Fuente, Historia eclesiástica de España, 4.265. The names and dates of the masters found in Rodríguez Campomanes, Dissertaciones históricas, 262, are unreliable. See chaps. 1076, 1079, 1085, and 1099 in PCG, ed. Menéndez Pidal. See González, Fernando III, 1.159; Cantiga IX (B464) in Paredes, “Las cantigas de escarnio,” 140. DAAX, doc. 2 (4–5) and doc. 39 (34–6). Argote de Molina, Nobleza del Andaluzía, 30a, 145b; Jimena Jurado, Catálogo de los obispos de Jaén, 99, 106, 108. Espinalt y García, Atlante español ... reino de Jaén, 13.225. Ortiz de Zúñiga, Anales de Sevilla, 1.184. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia (22, 59, 104, 221, 238); see also ­Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 552. Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.38. Salazar y Castro, Casa Farnese, 580–1; González, Fernando III, 1.150–1. González, Fernando III, 1.346. In PCG, chap. 1116, “Como Orias ouo su conseio con los moros que matasen al Infante don Alfonso a trayçion.”

362 87 88 89 90 91

92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100

101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109

110 111 112 113 114

Notes to pages 16–18 Utrilla Utrilla, “Los Maza de Huesca,” 815. Llibre dels feits, chaps. 30, 103 et passim. González, Fernando III, 1.121. Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 165, n. 1. “Don Jayme, sennor de Xerica, que es vno de los omnes del mundo que yo mas amo, ... me dixo que querria que los mis libros fablassen mas oscuro et me rogo que si algund libro feziesse, que non fuesse tan declarado,” Conde Lucanor, 439–40. Zurita, Anales, 290, reports that during the reign of Jaime II, Jaime II de Xérica, the king’s alférez, transferred control of the castle of Estida to Pedro Ladron de Vidaure. Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.341. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 226–8. Vázquez Campos, “Sobre los orígenes,” 334. Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.41, 234. Pellicer, Casa de Sarmiento de Villamayor, 60. González, Fernando III, doc. 200 (2.242); Martínez Sopena, La Tierra de Campos occidental, 401. In PCG, chap. 1125. In PCG, chaps. 1098–1101. “Infante don Alfonso dona a la O. de San Juan la iglesia del real de San Juan en Murcia” in CODOM 3, doc. 11 (14); see also Serra Ruiz, “La Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén,” doc. 1 (567). González, Fernando III, 1.133–6. In PCG, chaps. 1110, 1113, 1086, 1087; González, Fernando III, 1.166. González, Fernando III, 1.166. González, Fernando III, 1.159. González, Fernando III, 1.155. See Crónica particular de San Fernando, in PCG, chap. 1083 (751), and Salazar y Castro, Casa de Lara, 3.472. Text of document in Salazar y Castro, Casa de Lara, 673. González, Fernando III, 1.172. He was compensated in the partition of Seville: “Diol Çerraja a que puso nombre Trestamar ques en término de Alcalá de Guadaira; en que ay siete mill pies de olivar e de figueral, e por medida de tierra mill arançadas; ... e en Nubles, de término de Haznalcáçar, veinte yugadas” in Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.21, 229. “Et el primero que començo a matar garça con falcones fue vn omne bono que dizian don Rodrigo Gomes de Gallizia” in Libro de la caza, 1.559. In PCG, chaps. 1079, 1086, 1087, 1110, 1113; González, Fernando III, 1.168–9. Repartimiento de Sevilla, 1.268, 2.317. González, Fernando III, doc. 735 (3.301–3). Fernando III, 1.95, and Repartimiento de Sevilla, 1.260.



Notes to pages 19–20

363

115 Fernando III, 1.170–1. 116 He received one hundred aranzadas and ten yugadas in Planín, which ­Alfonso renamed Villahermanos, in the vicinity of Genzena and ­Tejada (2.40, 241), a donation that Alfonso X reconfirmed in a charter of 5 ­January 1258 in Bullarium ordinis militiae de Calatrava, doc. 8 (114–15), and that Pérez sold the same day to the Order of Calatrava (Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.332). 117 Armas, 1.124–5. The rest of this rather lengthy text goes on to describe in great detail the various meanings of the three symbols, all of which are entirely the product of Juan Manuel’s own fertile imagination. Fr. ­Vicente Velazquez de Figueroa, Libro de Becero del Convento Real de S. Juan y S. Pablo (1768–72), fol. 10, in his brief history of Juan Manuel as the ­convent’s founder, adds the interesting observation that the coat of arms represents an angel with a sword, alluding to the surname “Angelos” often associated, though inaccurately, with Manuel Komnenos. In this context, he refers to the interpretations found in the Hieroglyphica (1556), a popular sixteenth-century dictionary of symbols by Giovanni Pierio ­Valeriano Bolzani. For a history of the evolution of the Manueline arms, see Pretel Marín, “Las armas de los Manuel,” 5–26. 118 “AHN, Documentos de los Dominicos de Valladolid,” cited in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, doc. 837 (1100). Sancho IV reconfirmed this decree ten years later when, on 4 May 1282, he once again declared the monasteries and members of the order to be under his aegis; AHN, Documentos de Santo Domingo el Real, Madrid; cited in Ballesteros, Alfonxo X, doc. 1343 (1125). 119 Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 1.30 120 “Don Emanuel confirma” in Colección diplomática medieval de la Orden de Alcántara, doc. 224 (117–18). 121 The transcription reads “Joan González” and must be in error. 122 González, Fernando III, 1.156. 123 “[E]t mando et fizo llegar y sus fijos derredor de si todos, que fueron estos: los que de la reyna donna Beatriz su muger ouo don Alfonso que fue el mayor et heredero de sus reynos, et don Fradique, et don ­Enrrique, don Felipe, don Manuel; et don Sancho, que era luego en pos este, era arçobispo de Toledo, et non se açerto y, njn donna Berenguella que era monia en las Huelgas de Burgos. Los fijos que ouo dela reyna donna Iohana, que y estaua, que fue la postremera muger, eran estos: don F ­ ernando, donna Leonor, et don Loys, que fue menor de todos. Et desque estos todos sus fijos que y estauan derredor de sy vio et todos sus ricos omnes con ellos et la reyna su muger çerca de sy muy triste et muy quebrantada et non menos todos quantos otros y estauan, lugo primeramiente fizo açercar a si don Alfonso su fijo et alço la mano contra el et santiguolo et diol su bendiçion et desi a todos los otros sus fijos. Et rogo a don Alfonso que

364

124

125 126

127 128 129 130

131

Notes to pages 20–3 llegase sus hermanos a sy et los criase et los mantouiese bien et los leuase adelante quanto podiese” in PCG, chap. 1132 (772). “Quando el rey don Fer[r]ando fino en Seuilla, era y con el la reyna donna Juana, su muger, et el infante don Alfonso, su fijo, mio padre, que fue rey, et el infante don Alfonso de Molina, su hermano, et todos o los mas de sus fijos; et dexolos a todos muy bien heredados, saluo a vuestro padre, que era muy moço. Et don Pero Lopes de Ayala, que lo criaua, traxo el moço al rey et pidiol por merced que se acordase del. Et quando el llego, estaua ya el rey cerca de la muerte; pero non pudiendo fablar si non a muy grant fuerça, dixol: ‘Fijo, vos sodes el postremem fijo que yo oue de la reyna donna Beatriz, que fue muy santa et muy buena mugier, et se que vos amaua mucho; otrosi [vos amo yo], pero non vos puedo dar heredad ninguna, mas douos la mi espada Lobera, que es cosa de muy grant virtud, et con que me fizo Dios a mi mucho [bien], et douos estas armas, que son sennales de alas et de leones.’ Et en este lugar me conto el rey don Sancho commo estas armas fueron devisadas et lo que significauan: ‘Et dixo entonçe el rey don Ferrando a vuestro padre quel daua estas armas et esta espada et que pidia merced a nuestro señor Dios quel fiziese estas tres gracias: la primera, que doquier que estas armas et esta espada se acertasen que siempre venciesen et nunca fuesen vençidas; la segunda, que siempre [a los de] este linaje que traxiessen estas armas los creçiese Dios en la su onra et en su estado, et nunca los menguase ende; la terçera, que nunca en este linaje falleciesse heredero legitimo; et demas desto diol la su bendición, deziendo que pedia merced a Dios quel diese et le otorgase la bendicion que el le daua, ca el le daua todas bendiçiones quel podie dar; et que tenia que en estas cosas quel avia dado quel heredaba mejor que a ninguno de sus fijos” (138–9). Crónica, chap. 251 (325–6); Gran Crónica, chap. 59 (1.388). The testament is edited by González Jiménez, DAAX, doc. 518 (548–54), though the date he gives, 1283, follows the edition published in MHE, doc. 228 (2.110–22), an error that the editor duly rectified in DIAX, doc. 3319 (575). González, Fernando III, docs. 659, 660 (3.199–201). See also Mansilla Reoyo, Iglesia castellano-leonesa, 30–3. González, Fernando III, doc. 661 (3.201–2). Martène and Durand, eds., Veterem scriptorium, Epistola xxxiv, 2.1163. The contemporary historian Riccardo di San Germano reports in his Chronicon that “Mense Aprilis ... filius regis Castelle ad Imperatorem apud Fogiam venit” in Muratori, ed., Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, 7(2), 205; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,1, n. 3020. Winkelmann, Acta imperii inedita, vol. 1, docs. 358, 367, 376, 379, 1011; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1:542–623 et passim.



Notes to pages 23–5

365

132 Annales Placentini Gibellini: “Interea filius Regis Castellae ... fugit Mediolanum” (18:489). 133 “[E]l infante don Alfonso et sus hermanos don Fadrique et don Henrrique fueron posar sobre Triana cabo del rio” in PCG, chap. 1110 (762). 134 The response from Innocent IV dated 3 May 1246 expressing papal approval of Alfonso’s proposal is found in Mansilla Reoyo, Iglesia castellano-leonesa, 32, n 119; González, Fernando III, 1.270. Nine years later, in 1255, Alfonso once again petitioned the pope to approve his claims, and Alexander IV responded with an enthusiastic papal bull directed to “episcopos, abbates et principes” urging them to support the monarch in his quest; published in Pertz and Rodenberg, Epistolae saeculi XIII, doc. 372 (3.336–7). 135 One pie equaled one-third vara or twelve pulgadas, about 27.86 centimetres or 10.97 inches; also equals .0776 square metres. 136 Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.15–16 and 1.259–60; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 79, 262–72. 137 De rebus Hispanie, VIIII.xviii.301; PCG, chap. 1048 (736). 138 AHN, Uclés, 311, n. 11; Ballesteros, “Reconquista de Murcia,” 139–40; González, Fernando III, 1.346, n. 390. 139 Fernando III, doc. 718 (3.278). 140 Fernando III, 1.109. 141 “[D]e consuno con mi muger la reina donna Juana, et con mis fijos ­Alfonso, et Francisco [sic], et Hernando, et Enrico” in González, Fernando III, doc. 777 (3.346–8). Fernando de Ponthieu or Pontis, as he was known, lived between 1239 and 1269; González, Fernando III, 1.117. See also Kinkade, “A Royal Scandal,” 186–8. 142 San Esteban de Gormaz, 20 June 1239: “Yo el sobredicho Rey Don ­Ferrando ... con mios fijos Don Alfonso e Don Federic e Don Ferrando” in Colmenares, Historia de Segovia, 1.374. The document does not mention the other sons of Fernando: Enrique, Felipe, Sancho, and Manuel. 143 PCG, chaps. 1072 (748), 1092 (755), 1100 (758), and 1101 (758). See also González, Fernando III, 1.368–77. 144 AHN docs. reales de la Orden de Calatrava, nos. 74, 75, 80, 81; DAAX, docs. 15 (14) and 81 (85–7) cited in O’Callaghan, Learned King, 299, n. 39. See also Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 109, and Repartimiento de Sevilla, 1.248. 145 Écija, 8 January 1249; text published in DAAX, doc. 3 (5–6). 146 May 10 and 12: AHN, Calatrava I, R-75 and R-74, cited in González, ­Fernando III, 107; Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.299. 147 Repartimiento de Sevilla, 1.242–43 and 2.17; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 109. 148 The king’s acknowledgement of receipt of the charters on 24 March 1253 is published in DAAX, doc. 15 (14). 149 “Philipum, qui oblatus a domina Berengaria regina nobili auia sua Deo et Roderico Toletano pontifici per manus eiusdem pontificis ad titulum

366

150 151 152

153

154 155

156 157 158 159 160 161 162

163 164 165 166

Notes to pages 25–7 ecclesie Toletane in sortem Domini est uocatus” in Jiménez de Rada, De rebus Hispanie, VIIII.xii.292. For a concise account of Felipe’s early education, see Hernández, “La formación intelectual del primer arzobispo de Sevilla,” 607–20. Loperráez, Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma, 1.229; cited by González, Fernando III, 1.111. Ballesteros, “Don Juan ‘El Canciller,’” 148; see also Serrano, “El canciller de Fernando III,” 23–4. Serrano, Fuentes para la historia de Castilla, 53–4; Mañueco Villalobos, Documentos de la Iglesia Colegial de Santa María la Mayor, doc. 41 (2.219–22); González, Fernando III, 1.111. In this context, Ballesteros, Alfonso X, cites Alonso Getino, Dominicos ­españoles, “Supone el mismo autor que pudo ser condiscípulo del infante Don Felipe.” Albertus Magnus, Book of Minerals, bk. II, tractate iii, chap. 1 (128–9). Felipe confirms on 16 June 1250 for the first time as “procurator ecclesia Hyspalensis” in González, Fernando III, doc. 793 (3.366–8), though this same author states that Felipe was elected procurator on 24 June 1249 (1.206) without, however, providing documentary evidence to support this date. Hernández, “La formación intelectual del rimer arzobispo de Sevilla,” 615, n. 37, establishes his confirmation as procurator by Innocent IV on 25 May 1249. Doc. 839, Seville, 20 March 1252 in González, Fernando III, 3.422–4. Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.17–18. See Gaibrois de Ballesteros, “La Reina doña Mencía,” 501–39; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 526. Sancho confirms for the first time as archbishop-elect of Seville on 6 J­ anuary 1250 in González, Fernando III, doc. 812 (3.391–3). Seville, 22 April 1252, in González, Fernando III, doc. 841 (3.425–9). “Instructiones & Informationes de negotiis cum Rege Hispaniae tractandis” published in Rymer, Foedera, I.ii.6–7; see also Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 132–4. IV.101.340. Flórez, Reinas, remarks that Lucas was a deacon in the ­Cathedral of León at the time of Beatriice’s burial there shortly after 5 November 1235 and thus provides an eyewitness account (1.565). See O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María, 46–7. Flórez, Reinas (1.565, n. 1) wrongly identifies Juan el Canciller with Juan, bishop of Osma (1231–40). Rodríguez López, Real Monasterio de las Huelgas, 1.136. Archivo del Monasterio de las Huelgas, legajo 10, no. 330, cited in ­Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 101, n. 11; published in Garrido and Garrido, eds., Documentación del Monasterio de Las Huelgas, doc. 480 (31.298–300).



Notes to pages 27–32

367

167 See Documentación del Monasterio de Las Huelgas, doc. 354, 30.138–9 et ­passim; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 83, 192, 200, 489, 511, 854–5, 962; Rodríguez López, Real Monasterio de las Huelgas, 1.149–51, 446, 457–8; and González, Fernando III, 113. 168 “Carta de D. Pedro III al concejo de Burgos sobre haber el Infante D. ­Sancho desterrado a la Infanta Doña Berenguela de Castilla, abadesa de las ­Huelgas” in MHE, doc. 223 (2.101). 169 Documentación del Monasterio de las Huelgas, doc. 606 (32.131). 170 Documentación del Monasterio de las Huelgas, 33.11–87. 171 Rodríguez López, Real Monasterio de las Huelgas, 1.169, who states that Berenguela died at the end of 1288 or beginning of 1289. Garrido and Garrido, Documentación del Monasterio de las Huelgas, believe she died in 1290, citing a lost document (doc. 65, 33.125–6) dated “era 1328” (1290) from “fols. 227–232 de la Colección Salazar.” 172 For more information and additional bibliography concerning Jeanne de Ponthieu, see Kinkade, “A Royal Scandal,” 185–98. 2. The Royal Court in Seville: 1252–59 1 “Don Alfonso de Molina conf., D. Fradic conf., D. Manuel conf.” in Arch. Mun. de Palencia, 35, 26, published by Fernández de Pulgar, Historia eclesiástica de Palencia, 2, III, fols. 324–5; cited by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 87, n. 8, and “Itinerario,” 104 (1934): 53–4. 2 Alfonso García received 150 aranzadas and 20 yugadas in Ruxuxena Harat Aljena in the district of Aznalfarache, which the king renamed Campesina (Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.47, 235). 3 “Manuel ‘confirmó’ todos los privilegios alfonsinos desde 1252 hasta 1282” (Lomax, “Padre,” 166). 4 DAAX, doc. 4 (6–8). 5 González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 48–51. 6 See González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 49, n. 14. 7 “Et las posturas fizlas con conseio et con acuerdo de mio tio don Alfonso de Molina et de mios hermanos don Frederic, et don Felippe, et don Emanuel, et de los obispos et de los ricos omnes et de los caualleros et de las ordenes et de omnes buenos de las villas et de otros omnes buenos que se açertaron comigo,” my transcription of Arch. Mun. de Burgos, sig. HI-1391. See complete text in Gross, “Las Cortes de 1252: Ordenamiento otorgado al concejo de Burgos en las Cortes celebradas en Sevilla el 12 de octubre de 1252,” BRAH 182.1 (1985): 95–114. 8 “Don Manuel confirmó” in Vigil, Colección histórico-diplomática del Ayuntamiento de Oviedo, docs. 10–11 (31–4).

368

Notes to pages 32–4

9 22 January in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 15 (23–5); 21 February in MHE, doc. 4 (1.5–8); 28 February in DAAX, doc. 12 (11–12); 6 March in Colección diplomática medieval de la Orden de Alcántara, doc. 233 (123–5). 10 See DA, doc. 2. 11 “Este es el heredamiento que dio el rey don Alfonso al infante don M ­ anuel, su hermano: Diole Feliche, ques en término de Solúcar; e ha en ella diez mill pies de olivas e de figueras, e por medida de tierra ciento e cuarenta e çiinco arançadas, e fué dada por doçientas arançadas” (Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.18). 12 Lomax, “Padre,” 167, mistakenly identifies the region with Sanlúcar de ­Barrameda near Cádiz. His references on p. 167, n. 6, to pertinent information in the Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.18, 100, 284, are, with the exception of 2.18, erroneous and contain no mention of either Manuel or Eliche. 13 “Ha sido la región más apreciada de todo el territorio sevillano por sus ­riquezas y por la calidad de sus productos” (Repartimiento de Sevilla, 1.380); see maps, pp. 236, 373, and especially p. 380. 14 Repartimiento de Sevilla, 1.298–300; 2.139–46. 15 “Diole Solucar Albaida, que es en termino de Solucar; e dijeron que solia y auer siete mill pies de olivar e fincaron y los seis mill sanos; e avia y figueral para cien seras de figos e fincaron figueras para cinquenta seras de figos; e ay veinte e dos almarrales de vinnas e tres molinos de açeite caidos, e diez mill almarrales de tierra para pan, e sesenta casas e son las mas caidas, tres poços para huertas” (Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.15). 16 “Diole el aldea que dicen Borgabenalcadí, en que ay dos mill pies de olivas e figueras para seis mill seras de figos; e por medida de tierra avia en ella ochocientas arançadas; e es termino de Alcala de Guadayra” in Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.17; see maps, pp. 236, 373, 380. 17 (1) brother-in-law of Bishop Remondo of Segovia, in Borgabenzohar, Sanlúcar: five yug. (2.28), in Aznalcázar, thirty ar. and six yug. (2.33); (2) Fernando III’s chaplain, in Rauz/Palomares, Aznalfarache, and Utrera: twenty ar., five yug. (2.55, 252, 268); (3) GD de Vilforado, retainer of Fernando III, in Rauz/Palomares, Aznalfarache, and Utrera: thirty ar. and five yug. (2.56, 253, 269); (4) GD de Soria, retainer of Fernando III, in Amarlos, Rauz, and Utrera: twenty ar. and four yug. (2.63, 260); (5) GD de Huete, retainer of Fernando III, in Amarlos, Rauz, and Utrera: fifteen ar. and four yug. (2.63, 260); (6) Manuel’s ayo, in Pilas/Torre del Rey and Aznalcázar: thirty ar. and six yug. (2.73, 242); (7) a retainer of Queen ­Violante, in Palmaraya/Dueñas and Aznalfarache: twenty ar. and five yug. (2.87, 257); (8) a foot soldier of Fernando III, in Tejada (2.151, 273); (9) GD de la Copa, retainer of Fernando III, in Palomares twenty ar. (2.252), in Utrera five yug. (2.268); (10) canon of the Cathedral of Seville and



Notes to pages 34–5

18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27

369

retainer of Fernando III, in Aljubayán/Albebeín andAznalcázar: twenty ar. and five yug (2.256, 335). See Ballesteros, “Don Remondo de Losana”; Alfonso X, 320–5. Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, 95, and Alfonso X, 323. Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.28, 2.33, and 2.225. Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, doc. 32 (xxxiii-xxxiv). Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 217. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 217–18. Córdoba, 3 June 1260: “Yo Garcia Dominguez la fiz escrevir” in MHE, doc. 76 (1.160–1), and Córdoba, 20 September 1260: “Garcia Dominguez lo fizo” in MHE, doc. 80 (1.165–6). MHE, doc. 10 (1.19–21). MHE, doc. 70 (1.152–4). There are at least four distinct individuals named García Domínguez who received land grants in the Repartimiento de Sevilla. The first to be mentioned received twenty aranzadas and four yugadas in “Rauz, a que puso el rey nombre Criada, ques en término de Aznalfarache; ... e es dada a ­criazón del rey don Fernando; e dióles la heredad de pan en Utrera” (2.54). On 25 August 1253, he sold the property and rights to “Sancho ferrandez, escriuano del Rey” in a document in which he is now clearly identified as “Garcj dominguez de Segouia, criado de don Garci perez escriuano del Rey” (2.312). The entire text of the doc. is r­ ecorded in ­Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, doc. 32, xxxiii–xxxiv. We can be sure the document refers to the same García Domínguez, a retainer of Fernando III, because it states that the property is bounded by grants given to “­ Johan martin, et ... garcj sanchez escriuanos del Rey ... Sancho fferandez ... martin perez ... Johan de morales ... Johan dominguez ... Johan perez de Segouia ... Garçi Sancho ... gonçaluo martin escriuanos del Rey,” all of whom are listed in the Rauz partition (2.54–6). Furthermore, the bill of sale lists twenty aranzadas and four yugadas in Palomares and Utrera, precisely the wording of the partition with the exception of Rauz, which, however, was also known as Palomares (Repartimiento de Sevilla, 481, s.v. “Rauz”). The same nine recipients, with the exception of Johan de ­Morales, are listed in a separate section of the Repartimiento: “Estos los que heredan en Palomares, de criazón del rey don Ferrando” (2.252–3). All of these individuals were scribes or clerks in the court of F ­ ernando III. However, a second García Domínguez is referred to in the 25 August 1253 bill of sale: “e de la otra parte el solar de Garcia dominguez el cappellán que ffue del Rey” (xxxiii, doc. 32). The fact that he is mentioned here in the past tense does not necessarily mean that he was no longer living, only that he was no longer the chaplain of F ­ ernando III, who had died in May 1252. This point is clear from a charter given by Alfonso X

370

28

29 30

31 32

Notes to pages 35–6 one month later to Pedro Pérez “escriuano que fué del Rey don ­Fferrando mio padre” in Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, doc. 36, xxxvi. This document makes clear that the seller is García Domínguez de Segovia and not García Domínguez, the king’s chaplain. A third García Domínguez was given land in Pilas. The Repartimiento de Sevilla states: “Pilias, a que puso nombre el rey Tor del Rey, ques en termino de Aznalcaçar ... e es de criazon del rey don Alfonso; e dioles la heredad de pan en Alaquaz ... A Garcia Dominguez veinte ­arançadas, e cinco yugadas” (2.69–73). His grant is reiterated in another section: “Pilas, a que pus nombre Torre del Rey, a los de la criazon del rey don ­Alfonso; a la heredat del pan en Alaquaz” (2.242, 245) In this same ­section, three lines up, we find “A Garcia Domingues, ayo de don ­Manuel, XXX ­arançadas, VI yugadas,” but, as we have stated above, this is clearly an error for “Gonçalo Dominguez” and cannot be identified with the García Domínguez three lines below him who received only twenty aranzadas and five yugadas, though both are referred to as ­members of the criazón or retainers of King Alfonso. There is yet another García Domínguez. The Repartimiento says, “Estas son las alcarias de los caualleros de mesnada, e de los alcalles del rey, e de los de criazon, e de los obispos, e de los adalides, e de los escriuanos, e de los clerigos, e de los monasterios, e de los maestres, e de todos los que son escriptos en este libro ... Sant Yllán de los maestros, e la heredat del pan en Haznalcaçar ... A Garcia Dominguez XL arançadas, VI yugadas” (2.239–40). The recipients of the land grants in this section were important people in Alfonso’s court, as we can surmise from the fact that two lines above this García Domínguez we find “don Remondo,” bishop of Segovia, who was assigned thirty aranzadas and five yugadas. This particular individual, then, might well be identified with García Domínguez, the king’s notary in Andalusia. “[Q]ue el nuestro cuerpo sea enterrado en nuestro monesterio de Sancta Maria la Real de Murçia, que es cabeza de este reyno, et primero lugar que Dios quiso que ganasemos a servicio del, e a honrra del Rey Don ­Fernando, e de nos, et de nuestra tierra” in MHE, doc. 229 (2.124). Armas, 1.132. In Arch. Catedral de Murcia, Inventario, fols. 52–4, in Torres Fontes, CODOM 1, doc. 25 (37–9). The most accurate account of the foundation and evolution of the “Tierra de Don Manuel” is a recent article by Pretel Marín, “Entre el cuento y la historia,” especially subsection 3, “La tierra del infante don Manuel,” 16–21. Llibre dels feits, VI, chaps. 290–5; Zurita, Anales, 3.35; cited in González, Fernando III, 340, n. 358–9. Zurita, Anales, 3.36; cited in González, Fernando III, 340, n. 360.



Notes to pages 37–8 33 34 35 36 37 38

39 40 41 42 43 44

45 46

47 48 49 50

371

González, Fernando III, 341. González, Fernando III, 341. González, Fernando III, 341. See PCG, chap. 1060 (741), and González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 24–5. PCG, chap. 1060 (742). AHN, Uclés, 311, núm. 11; cited in González, Fernando III, 1.346, n. 390. When Fernando III subsequently reassigned these lands to Queen Juana, Doviñal appears to have taken his revenge on Juana by penning several cantigas de escarnho, scurrilous poems purporting to describe the illicit relationship between Infante Enrique and his step-mother the queen; see R. Kinkade, “A Royal Scandal,” 191–2. See also Víñez Sánchez, El trovador Gonçal’Eanes Dovinhal, 24–5 et passim. AM de Alcaraz, cited by González, Fernando III, 1.344. See Riera i Melis, “La delimitació del sector meridional,” 83–6. AHN, Sellos 49–9; Uclés, 118.2; cited by González, Fernando III, 1.351, n. 408; the text of the document is published in Salazar y Castro, Casa de Lara, 673. AHN, Sellos, 63–2; cited in González, Fernando III, 1.351, n. 407. ANTT, gav. 18, m. 9, núm. 16; cited by González, Fernando III, 1.352, n. 415. Calatrava la Nueva, 15 March 1252: “La Orden de Calatrava da su recibo a la reina doña Juana de veintiséis privilegios de ésta que la Orden tenía en custodia” in AHNCalatrava, P-107, in Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 16 (14–15). Colleción diplomática medieval de la Orden de Alcántara, doc. 227 (119–21). In 1262, Infante Luis transfered land that had come into his possession after his mother left Castile and that had been given in 1253 to her ­notary, Pedro Pérez: “la casa de los míos molinos que fueron de don Pedro Pérez, chanceler que fue de la reyna donna Johanna, mi madre, que dexó a ella quando él se finó, e óuelos yo después della” in DAAX, Seville, 9 ­December 1262, doc. 258 (286–7); see also Seville, 20 December 1253, doc. 91 (95–6). The designation “depués della” does not refer to her death since she did not die until 15 March 1279, but rather to the fact that she had given up all her inheritance in Castile following her return to ­Ponthieu. For the details of Juana’s life following the death of Fernando III in 1252, see Kinkade, “A Royal Scandal,” 185–94. Bullarium ordinis militiae de Alcantara, Seville, 28 June 1261, doc. 32 (104–5). Martínez Morellá, Privilegios , doc. 1; cited in González, Fernando III, 1.459, n. 176. Bulario de Santiago, doc. 3 (189); cited by González, Fernando III, 1.350, n. 405. DAAX, 7 May, doc. 25 (21–3); 3 June, doc. 31 (26–8); 21 June, doc. 42 (38–40); 22 June, doc. 43 (40–2); 2 August, doc. 50 (47–8); 20 August, doc. 59 (56–7); 26 September, doc. 67 (63–5); 10 October, doc. 70 (67–8); 25 ­November, doc. 74 (70–2); 25 November, doc. 75 (72–4); 2 December,

372

51 52 53

54 55

56 57 58 59 60 61

62

63 64

65

Notes to pages 38–40 doc. 77 (75–6); 3 December, doc. 79 (77–80); 6 December, doc. 80 (80–5); 8 December, doc. 81 (85–7); 20 December, doc. 90 (93–5); Documentación medieval de la Catedral de Segovia, 22 June, doc. 152 (251–4); Colección diplomática medieval de la Orden de Alcántara, 22 August, doc. 238 (127–8). See Hernández, “Relaciones de Alfonso X con Inglaterra y Francia,” 169–87. González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 75–81; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 151–2; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 92–6. Zurita, Anales, 3.48.569; Moret, Annales de Navarra, 3.66–8; Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 231; Bofarull et al., ed., Colección de documentos inéditos del ACA, 4.3; Huici Miranda and Cabanes Pecourt, eds., Documentos de Jaime I de Aragón, 1.578; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 89; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 153. Rymer, Foedera, I.I.178. Rymer, Foedera, 31 March 1254; 20 April 1254 (I.I.179–80); Matthew Paris, Chronica majora, 5.397; Marsh, English Rule, 144–9; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 151–2; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 92–9. Rymer, Foedera, I.I.180. “De Matrimonio inter primogenitum Regis Aragoniae & Beatricem Filiam Regis” in Rymer, Foedera, 24 May 1253 (I.I.174). Zurita, Anales: “Juntamente fue concordado que el rey daría a su hija la infanta doña Constanza por mujer al rey Tibaldo” (3.48.570). O’Callaghan, Cortes of Castile-León, 21. See González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 79–80. In fact, Zurita, Anales, reports that war had already broken out as early as April 1254: “En este medio se rompió la guerra entre el rey y su y ­ erno el rey de Castilla ... en principio del mes de abril del año de 1254” (3.49.572). DAAX, 20 February, doc. 111 (108–10); 18 March, doc. 118 (116–18); 22 March, doc. 121 (119–21); 23 March, doc. 122 (121–3); 27 March, doc. 124 (125–6); 28 March, doc. 125 (126–8); 16 April, doc. 128 (129–31); 20 April, doc. 129 (131–3); 22 April, doc. 130 (133–5); 22 April, doc. 132 (136–9); 22 April, doc. 133 (139–42); 4 May, doc. 136 (145–8); Izquierdo Benito, ­Privilegios, 2 March, doc. 25 (118); MHE, 5 March, doc. 10 (1.19–21); Chaves, A ­ puntamiento legal, 6 April (8–8v); Bullarium ordinis militiae de ­Calatrava, 16 April, doc. 15 (129–31); 27 April, doc. 19 (97–100); 27 April, doc. 20 (100–103); 19 May, doc. 21 (103–5). González Jiménez and Carmona Ruiz, DIAX, doc. 355 (59). “Privilegio rodado de Alfonso X concediendo a Mula los castillos de Bullas y Pliego” in Acero y Abad, Historia de Mula, 182–4; cited by Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 18 (28–30). “Privilegio rodado a Cartagena: Concesión de término concejil” in Casal Martínez, Leyendas, tradiciones y hechos históricos de Cartagena, 407–8; cited by Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 20 (30–1).



Notes to pages 40–2

66

67 68

69 70 71

72

73

373

In Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 107, Torres Fontes also remarks that “La delimitación de la jurisdicción de Cartagena, ordenada por Alfonso X en 4 de septiembre de 1254, señalaba que desde el Hondón se continuara hasta el Albujón con su rambla, hasta la muela o cabezo de Roldán, hasta el retiro de San Ginés de la Jara, y hasta la Albufera o Mar Menor. La ‘albuhera de Cabo de Palos,’ otorgada en gran parte al infante don Manuel, quedaba por entonces fuera de la jurisdicción de Murcia, y por ello podemos prolongar la línea divisoria de cristianos y mudéjares en el campo, por una zona muy próxima en la actual carretera de Murcia a Cartagena, hasta llegar a la rambla del Albujón, en donde comenzaba el término cartagenero.” The first document indicating that the Albufera ­belonged to Infante Manuel was given by Alfonso X in Jaén on 18 May 1267 in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 31 (43–9). 1.579–80. See Martín Cantarino, “El acequia que don Manuel mandó facer,” 257 et passim. See also Pretel Marín, Historia de Villena hasta el siglo XVII, 313–15. See Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, 228–53. Llibre dels feits, chap. 371 (315). Zurita, Anales, supports this report: “y duró la guerra entre ellos más de tres años; y en este tiempo Alazdrach se entretuvo con favor del rey de Castilla y de los infantes don Manuel y don Fadrique” (3.50.578). Llibre dels feits, chap. 369 (368). See also Zurita, Anales, 3.50.577. Chronica majora, 5.449; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 152; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 99–102. Jofré de Loaysa, Crónica, 17: “Et propter gloriosam famam suam multi nobiles et egregii viri de diversis mundi partibus veniebant ad ipsum, ut ab eo reciperent cingulum militare inter quos fuit ... nobilissimi infantes dompnus Philippus; dompnus Hemanuel; Ferrandus Pontivi et Ludovicus, germani eiusdem regis Alfonsi.” Rymer, Foedera, I.188–9, has published a facsimile of the 1 November 1254 concession by Alfonso to Edward of all possessions in Gascony, a document subscribed by “Inffans ffredericus, Inffans Emericus et Inffans Manuel, et Inffans fferandus et Inffans ffilypus electus ecclesie hyspaliis, et Inffans Sancius electus ecclesie toletanus”; see also Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 104 (1934): 481–2. Burgos, 27 November: “Don Ffrederich la conf. Don Henrrich conf. Don Manuell conf. Don Ffernando conf. Don Ffelipp, electo de Seuilla, la conf. Don Sancho, electo de Toledo, la conf.” in Cantera Burgos, “Miranda en tiempos de Alfonso X,” 144. Nineteen other documents given in Burgos present the same signatories: Vigil, Colección de Oviedo, 12 December, doc. 6 (25); Documentación del Monasterio de Las Huelgas, 17 December, docs. 455–64 (31.250–72); doc. 466 (31.275); docs. 468–71 (31.278–86), and

374

74

75

76 77 78

79 80 81 82

83 84 85 86 87 88

89

Notes to pages 42–5 docs. 474–5 (31.290–2); MHE, 28 December, doc. 25 (1.54–6); Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, doc. 67 (lxviii–lxx), though the same text in DAAX, doc. 142 (152–4), does not list Infante Manuel as a signatory. “Este es el heredamiento que dio al infante don Henrique: Diole el aldea que dicen Borgabenalcaldí, en que ay dos mill pies de olivas e figueras para seis mill seras de figos; e por medida de tierra avia en ella ­ochocientas ­arançadas; e es termino de Alcala de Guadayra” (Repartimiento de Sevilla, 2.17). See vv. 70–7 of the Poema de mio Cid, ed. Michael: “Fabló Martín ­Antolínez, odredes lo que a dicho: ... no lo preçio un figo” (it’s not worth a fig) (82). Consider, also, God’s curse of the bad figs in the Old T ­ estament (Jeremiah 24:8–10), Christ’s curse of the fig tree in the New Testament (Matthew 21:19), or the parable of the fig tree in Luke 13:6–9. See Kinkade, “A Royal Scandal,” 185–98. O’Callaghan, Learned King, 72–4, 154; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 105–8. ACA, Pergamino 1383 de Jaume I; cited by Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 241; Huici Miranda and Cabanes Pecourt, Documentos de Jaime I de Aragón, 3.147–50, 157–8; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 154. Quintana Prieto, Documentación Inocencio IV, doc. 952 (2.837); O ­ ’Callaghan, Learned King, 73; Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, 91–8. Juan Manuel errs in calling Isabel de Aragón “Blanca.” Constanza de Aragón (1239–66), daughter of Jaime I of Aragón and Violante of Hungary; married to Infante Manuel in April 1256. Constanza de Aragón (1300–27), daughter of Jaime II of Aragón (1264; r. 1294–1327) and Blanca, daughter of Charles II of Naples, was betrothed to Juan Manuel on 9 May 1303 (Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 49 [265–6]) and married to him on 3 April 1312 (Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 237 [403–6]). She was the great niece of Constanza de Aragón, married to Infante Manuel. Armas, 1.127–34. See Kinkade, “Violante de Aragón.” Zurita, Anales, 3.42.111; Llibre dels feits, chaps. 226–8. O’Callaghan, Learned King, 74. Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 244; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 113. “Don Alfonso de Molina, Don Frederic Don Henric, Don Manuel, Don Ferrando, Don Felipp, electo de Sevilla, Don Sancho, electo de Toledo” in Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Silos, doc. 156 (209). Colleción diplomática del Concejo de Burgos, 14 February, doc. 25 (89–92); 22 February, doc. 26 (93–6); 25 February, doc. 27 (96–8); Documentación del Monasterio de Las Huelgas, 24 February, doc. 480 (31.298–310); Documentación del Monasterio de San Juan de Burgos, 24–26 February, doc. 83 (120), doc. 84 (122), doc. 85 (125).



Notes to pages 45–8

375

90 O’Callaghan, Learned King, 174–8; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 146–52. 91 DAAX, 2 April, doc. 146 (155–8); Fernández Conde, Monasterio de San ­Pelayo de Oviedo, 4 April, doc. 101 (191–3); Pérez Celada, Documentación del Monasterio de San Zoilo de Carrión, 12 April, doc. 132 (226–8); Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, 17 April, doc. 3 (4–7). 92 Daumet, Mémoire, 5 May (146); Bullarium ordinis militiae de Calatrava, 23 May, doc. 1 (105–6); Colleción diplomática medieval de la Orden de Alcántara, 25 May, doc. 253 (137–9); 27 May, doc. 254 (139–41); 28 May, docs. 256–62 (141–55); 29 May, docs. 263–4 (155–9 ); 5 June, docs. 265–6 (159–63); DAAX, 1 June, doc. 152 (163–7); Crespi de Valldaura, 1 June, “Privilegio rodado de Alfonso X a Santa Cruz de Campezo,” 152; Torres Fontes, Fueros y ­privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, 15 June, doc. 21 (32–4). 93 DAAX, 9 July, doc. 158 (171–3); Documentación del Monasterio de Las ­Huelgas, 10–11 July, doc. 484–5 (31.306–9); Colleción diplomática del ­Concejo de Burgos, 18 July, doc. 30 (100–105); Documentos de la iglesia Colegial de Santa María la Mayor, 10–11 September, doc. 50 (2.286–9), doc. 51 (2.297–8); Fuero de Salamanca, 6 October (167); Bullarium ordinis militiae de ­Calatrava, 10 October, doc. 3 (107–9). 94 “[A]sta quel vuestro pleito se ponga en guisa e en manera que vos seades pagado,” ACA, perg. 1428 de Jaume I, cited by Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 247. See also Huici Miranda and Cabanes Pecourt, Documentos de Jaime I de Aragón, 6 September, docs. 682–3 (3.171–3, 175–6); MHE, 23 October, doc. 36 (1.75–6); O’Callaghan, Learned King, 74; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 114; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 84–8. 95 ACA, perg. 1427 de Jaume I, cited by Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 247. 96 DAAX, doc. 163 (179–80) and doc. 165 (182–4); see also González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 84. 97 Armas, 1.131. 98 CAX, 8.23. 99 “Esta cantiga fez don Gonçalo Eanes do Vinhal a don Anrique en nome da reinha dona Joana, sa madrastra, porque dizian que era su entendedor, quando lidou en Mouron con don Nuno e con don Rodrigo Alonso que tragia o poder del rei” in Nunes, Cantigas d’amigo dos trovadores galego-portugueses, 2.132; see also Kinkade, “A Royal Scandal,” 185, and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 120. 100 López Ferreiro, Iglesia de Santiago, 5.217; Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 105 (1934): 154 and Alfonso X, 117, 123; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 74. 101 See DA, doc. 3. Lomax, “Padre,” 168–9, mistakenly attributes the letter to Henry’s brother, Richard of Cornwall, and the date to 30 January 1256, though the salutation clearly states “Rex dilecto & fideli suo, Johanni Manusell” and the undated document is placed by Rymer between other charters from October to November 1255.

376

Notes to pages 48–53

102 “De Dote por Alianora sorore Regis Castellae per Edwardum primogenitum Regis” in Rymer, Foedera, 20 July 1254 (I.184). 103 “Concessiones Henrici Regis Edwardo filio primogenito” in Rymer, Foedera, 28 August 1254 (I.185) et passim. 104 de Laborde, Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, doc. 4192 (3.253–6 at 254); ­Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 132. 105 Lomax, “Padre,” 169. 106 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 117–18. 107 “D. Fadric, conf. D. Enrrique, conf.... D. Manuel, conf.” in Loperráez, ­Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma, doc. 58 (3.81–5). 108 Gómez Moreno, “La crónica de la población de Ávila,” 53–5; my translation. 109 DIAX, doc. 1054 (174). 110 Documentación del Monasterio de San Zoilo de Carrión, 20 January, doc. 134 (230–3); DAAX, 22 January, doc. 171 (189–90). 111 “Estando el Rey en Soria con mui grandes poderes que quiere entrar al Reygno de Aragón, veno el Rey Don Jaimes su suegro a él con sus fijos, et fijas, et metióse en mano del Rey Don Alfonso, que ficies dél, et de los fijos, et del Regno lo quel tovies por bien. Et casaron luego al Infante Don Manuel su hermano con la Infante Doña Constanza fija del Rey Daragón. Los Reyes avenidos, et puestos sus amores en uno, fues el Rey Don Jaimes a Aragón, et el Rey Don Alfonso mandó a todas sus yentes, que se fuesen cada unos a sus Logares” in Marín, Miraculos romanzados, 134. See also González Jiménez and Molina Molina, eds., Los milagros romanzados, 49. 112 See Ballesteros Alfonso X, 128, n. 31; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 154; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 88–9. 113 Oceja Gonzalo, Documentación del Monasterio de San Salvador de Oña, 11 February, doc. 163 (141–3); DAAX, 13 February, doc. 173 (191–3). 114 Armas, 1.129–30. 115 González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 84, n. 37. 116 “Et el rey don Jaymes no lo quiso y tener contra voluntad del rey don ­Alfonso, e mandóle que fuese fuera del reyno” in CAX, 8.23. 117 Documentos de Jaime I, docs. 702 (7 February), 703 (21 February), 705 (11 March), 707 (30 April), 708 (1 May), and 709 (2 May). 118 “Y en Soria se vieron él y el rey de Castilla por el mes de marzo siguiente a donde quedaron muy confederados y conformes: y renovaron las ­alianzas y amistades que los reyes sus antecesores tuvieron” in Zurita, Anales, 3.52.584. 119 “Assi como dizen las cartas que fueron fechas entre Nos et Vos en Soria” in MHE, doc. 57 (1.121), and “assi quomo dicen las cartas que son entre Nos et el Rey de Castiella que fueron fechas en Soria” in MHE, doc. 58 (1.123) and Documentos de Jaime I, docs. 742 (3.229–30) and 743 (3.230–1).



Notes to pages 53–7

377

120 ACA, Perg. 1650 de Jaume I, in Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 298–9. 121 This is probably the same Martín Martínez appointed on three occasions by Infante Manuel as a partitioner of Elche, in Ibarra y Ruiz, Riego de Elche, 7 December 1267 (72–4); Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, 7 December 1267, doc. 39 (36) and 11 August 1276, doc. 65 (61–2). 122 Armas, 1.131. 123 Juan Manuel’s error is repeated by Rubio García, “La infanta Doña Constanza,” 108, who dates the marriage to February 1266 and Jaime I’s intervention in Murcia. 124 DAAX, doc. 177 (196–7). 125 Documentación Catedral de Segovia, doc. 159 (265–8). 126 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 152. 127 Documentos de Jaime I, doc. 742 (3.229–30): “assi como dizen las cartas que fueron fechas entre nos et vos en Soria, sacado ende lo del regno de ­Murcia, que debe ser enmendado et endereçado, despues que vos lo ­ganastes fata agora, assi como dizen las cartas que son entre nos et vos, que fueron fechas en la cerca de Biar” (229). 128 See DA, doc. 4. 129 See DA, doc. 5. 130 DAAX, doc. 179 (198–200). 131 Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, 5 July, doc. 26 (36–8); DAAX, 13 July, doc. 180 (200–202). 132 DAAX, 13 July, doc. 180 (200–202); 26 September, doc. 186 (205–7); ­Loperráez, Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma, 19 July, doc. 61 (3.182–5), and MHE, doc. 43 (1.89–93); Pretel Marín, Conquista, 22 July, doc. 5 (266–7); Colleción diplomática del Concejo de Burgos, 27 July, doc. 32 (106–11); Barrios García, Documentación medieval de la Catedral de Ávila, 28 August, doc. 81 (67). 133 O’Callaghan, Learned King, 199–200; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 169–70; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 113. 134 Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, 228–33. 135 “Perseveró mucho tiempo Alazrach en su rebelión y traía sus pláticas secretamente con el infante don Manuel hermano del rey de Castilla que era señor de Villena; y después las trajo con el mismo rey por se avenir con él contra el rey de Aragón, no obstante la nueva concordia” (Zurita, Anales, 3.53.119). 136 “[C]onsiderando el rey el trato que el rey de Castilla traía por apoderarse de los lugares que no eran de su conquista, determinó con arte y maña de acabar lo que dificultosamente pudiera continuando la guerra” (Zurita, Anales, 3.53.119). 137 “E el rei de Castella pregà’ns que li donàssem treva per amor d’ell: e ell havia-li enviat son penó, e altre que en tenia ja de don Manuel. E el rei de

378

138

139 140

141 142 143 144 145 146

147 148 149

Notes to pages 57–9 Castella havia’ls-en tramès altre, en manera que els tenia ja en sa ­comanda” in Llibre dels feits, chap. 372 (315). See also Zurita, Anales, 3.53.119. ­However, see González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 78–9, who presents a series of well-reasoned arguments against the conclusions drawn by Jaime I. “Jaime nunca menciona ni a Constanza ni a su relación familiar con ­Manuel, omisión curiosa pero cuyo significado no queda claro” in ­Lomax, “Padre,” 172. Llibre dels feits, chap. 376; Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 1.275, 278; Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, 232–3. “Con esta condición salió después de la tierra habiendo hecho en ella gran daño y guerra como capitán muy astuto y mañoso. Y así también sucedió que usando el rey de Castilla en este hecho de maña y astucia, habiéndose como tercero, ni pudo evitar el odio de los pobladores de aquella comarca ni consiguió lo que pretendía” in Zurita, Anales, 3.53.119; see also Burns, “The Crusade against Al-Azraq.” Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 175, 1076. See O’Callaghan, Learned King, “Preparations for the African Crusade,” 167–72. Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 15 (23–5); see also O’Callaghan, Learned King, 47–8; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 70. MHE, doc. 8 (1.13–17); see also Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 108 (1936): 36. Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 7 (9–11); see also Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Lorca, 55–7. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia: “Cuando en el año 1257 el rey Sabio realiza una visita de inspección por el reino de Murcia, ­apreciando la realidad de cuanto sucedía y del desarrollo que la vida castellana había alcanzado en la capital del reino, decidió llevar a cabo una ­reorganización política y administrativa, destinada a mejorar la vida de sus súbditos cristianos que convivían entonces con los musulmanes. Una de mayor alcance sería la sustitución del merino mayor del reino murciano, cargo puramente administrativo y de corto alcance en las funciones ­propias de la dirección política, por un adelantado mayor, que ­asumiendo las atribuciones propias del merino, añadía las de su cargo, especialmente políticas y militares. En el aspecto de la política local, también se logró un considerable avance con la constitución del concejo, órgano coordinador de los castellanos en la vida ciudadana” (194). Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 29 (41–3), doc. 30 (43–5), doc. 31 (45–7); MHE, 23 May, doc. 53 (1.111–13). Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 32 (47–50). Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, 6 May, doc. 35 (51–3), doc. 36 (53–5); DAAX, 8 May, doc. 192 (212–14); 20 May, doc. 193 (214–16).



Notes to pages 59–60

379

150 Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 8 (11–14). 151 Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 32 (48); the charter transferring Elda to the Order of Santiago is published in Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 6 (6): “Entrega del castillo de Elda a la Orden de Santiago y convenio con los herederos de don Guillén el Aleman.” 152 See García Díaz, “Señoríos murcianos del infante don Manuel,” 192–3. 153 Murcia, 5 July 1243: “El infante don Alfonso confirma a la Orden de Santiago la donación de la villa de Segura y de los lugares de Moratalla, Socovos, Priego y otros” in DAAX, doc. 1 (3). Among those who confirm are “Rodericus Gonçalui Giron, Elche tenens.” 154 Guadalajara, 31 December 1244, doc. in ANTT, gta. 14, m. 1, no. 15, cited by Huarte y Echenique, “Catálogo de documentos,” 797–8. 155 See Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 290. 156 Burgos, 25 October 1255, ANTT, gta. 18, m. 9, n. 12, in Huarte y Echenique, “Catálogo de documentos,” 799. 157 Alcocer, 22 September 1260: “Carta de doña Mayor Guillén fundando un convento de franciscanas cerca de Alcocer” in AHN, Documentos de Santa Clara de Alcocer, published in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 289. 158 Sevilla, 22 April 1262: “Alfonso X designa a su hermano Manuel como adelantado del reino de Murcia y le concede por juro de heredad las ­villas de Elche, Crevillente, Aspe y valle de Elda,” in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 62, who does not publish the document but gives only a reference to Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 346, where Ballesteros says nothing whatsoever about the territories mentioned but only about Manuel’s supposed appointment as adelantado. Ballesteros’s affirmation in this regard had been made earlier in his “Itinerario,” 107 (1935): 56 (Sevilla, 25 April 1262): “Alfonso X nombra por su Adelantado mayor en el Reino de Murcia a su hermano don Manuel. (Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, fol. 228. No dice de dónde lo sacó. Papeletas de Académicos, Huerta.)” The document to which Ballesteros refers, however, is not cited at all by Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, 24, and there is, then, no reason to suspect that the adelantado at this time was any other than Alfonso García, who had been appointed “adelantado mayor de tierra de Murcia y del Andaluzia” on 24 March 1261. See also ­MacDonald, Leyes de los Adelantados Mayores, n. 20 (63). 159 Lomax, “Padre,” 167; García Díaz, “Señoríos murcianos del infante don Manuel,” 190; Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, 25. It seems very likely that Torres Fontes initially followed Ibarra, Historia de Elche, who claims that Infante Alfonso, following the conquest of Elche and Murcia in 1243, “dejó por su Adelantado en este Reino de Murcia a su hermano el infante D. Manuel, dándole por juro de heredad las villas

380

160

161 162

163

164 165 166

167

168 169 170 171 172 173

174 175

Notes to pages 60–4 y castillos de Elche, Crevillente, Aspe y el valle de Elda” (37). Manuel at that time, however, was only about nine years of age. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 175–212; see also the extensive bibliography on the subject in Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 106 (1935): 107–16; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 198–213; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 118–20. Denholm-Young, Richard of Cornwall, 81–2. Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación pontificia de Alejandro IV, Naples, 4 February 1255, doc. 23 (50–1); Otto, “Alexander IV,” 77; Ballesteros, ­Alfonso X, 135, 215–16. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 341, 482, 584, and 962, provides an important assessment of the former royal notary who subsequently betrayed his ­benefactor in 1282, but overlooks this most important embassy to the ­Curia to which Alexander IV refers in a bull dated 1 July 1256 addressed to the Church of Salamanca urging them to ignore any problems that may arise during the absence of D. Martín, bishop of León, who was sent to Anagni “illustris regis Castelle ac Legionis negotiis promovendis,” in Rodenberg and Pertz, Epistolae saeculi XIII, doc. 436 (3.394). See also ­Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9065, and Otto, “Alexander IV,” 76. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 216; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 201. Otto, “Alexander IV,” 80. The debt of 135,000 marks consisted of expenses incurred by the ­papacy up to that point in its unsuccessful war against Manfred and was, ­according to Powicke, Thirteenth Century, “nearly twice the amount to be expected from the crusading tenth for five years” (121). Rolandino da Padova relates that he personally saw letters from Alfonso to Ezzelino though it was rumoured they were counterfeit: “Et vidi ego tunc temporis litteras huius regis in Padua ipsius sigillatas sigillo ... Et creditum fuit in Padua, quod dolose fecerat fabricare Ecelinus illas l­ itteras in Verona” in Rolandini Patavini Chronica, MGH SS, 19.32–147 at 127. CAX, 18.50–1. DAAX, doc. 199 (218–20). O’Callaghan, Cortes de Castile-León, 21; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 199–207. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 201, believes Fadrique, Manuel, Fernando, and Luis were absent. DAAX, doc. 202 (221–3); doc. 203 (224–6). Böhmer, Regesta Imperii: “Alfons liess nun das electus im titel fallen un nannte sich geradezu einen römischen könig; aber nur in den urkk. für das reich, während er in denen für Spanien überhaupt nur di spanischen königstitel führt” (V,1,2 n. 5488c). Gelsinger, “Norwegian-Castilian Alliance,” 58. Gelsinger, “Norwegian-Castilian Alliance,” 58.



Notes to pages 65–6

381

176 Naples, 5 Id. Maii 1255: “Bulla quod, facta commutatione votorum Regis Norweyae, & aliorum ejusdem Regni ad Terram Sanctam in negotium regni Siciliae, compellantur accedere ibidem” in Rymer, Foedera, I.1.195. 177 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 198, who also errors in stating that Luis was older than Fernando. The latter was born around 1239 and Luis around 1242. 178 Though Ballesteros, Alfonso X, states that Remondo was not confirmed as archbishop of Seville until 26 September 1259, a royal privilege published in Toledo, 27 July 1259, is subscribed by “D. Remondo, Arzobispo de ­Sevilla” in MHE, doc. 68 (1.150). 179 DAAX, doc. 203 (224–6), doc. 203 (221–3). 180 MHE, doc. 63 (1.135–8). Though Manuel does not appear to have endorsed this particular document, Martínez Morellá, Privilegios, doc. 9 (20–21), has published three copies of the same charter preserved in the AM de Alicante that states at the end of the manuscript: “Et fue firmado de don Manuel et de don Ferrando et de los Obispos et de los ricos hommes vassallos del Rey segunt en ell se contiene.” 181 “Privilegio de Alfonso X a la Villa de Cáceres” in Ulloa y Golfín, Fueros y privilegios de Cáceres, 95. 182 “Privilegio de Alfonso X a los clérigos de Santa María la mayor” in Mañueco Villalobos, Documentos de la Iglesia Colegial de Santa María la Mayor, doc. 55 (2.325–30). 183 15 July: “Carta de Alfonso X al concejo de Alicante” in Martínez Morellá, Privilegios, doc. 21 (26–7); 17 July: “Alfonso X concede a Per del Castel la aldea de Bornos” in DAAX, doc. 207 (228–30). 184 “D. Garcia Suarez, Merino mayor del regno de Murcia,” in MHE, doc. 63 (1.137). 185 DAAX, doc. 211 (232–4). 186 In this regard, Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, asserts that “Todo este conjunto de disposiciones, tendentes a dotar de coherencia política al territorio mediante la repoblación cristiana y tendentes a su más e­ fectivo control a través del obispado de Cartagena y de la presencia de los ­monjes santiaguistas, se vio reforzado por el nombramiento, en 1258, de un a­ delantado mayor del reino de Murcia en la persona del fiel Alfonso García de Villamayor. Teniendo en cuenta el carácter eminentemente militar del cargo, resulta significativa su implantación sustituyendo a un merino anterior” (206, n. 113). 187 Diego’s brother, Fernando Sánchez, held property in Feliche near Infante Manuel, which he gave to the Order of Alcántara when he became a member of that religious community. Diego Sánchez attempted to r­ eclaim it in August 1259 but was unsuccessful; see Colleción diplomática medieval de la Orden de Alcántara, doc. 298 (188–9); Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 108 (1936): 36.

382

Notes to pages 66–70

188 DAAX, docs. 211 (232–4), 212 (234–7), and 213 (237–8). In docs. 211 and 212, he confirms as “Don Manuel” and in the third as “El Infante don Manuel, ermano del Rey, su alférez.” In MHE, doc. 66 (1.147), a copy of doc. 213, Manuel’s name does not appear. 189 Olmedo, 31 July 1274: “Privilegio de Alfonso X a los clérigos de Medina de Pomar” in García Sáinz de Baranda, Apuntes históricos sobre la ciudad de Medina de Pomar, 150, 381–4. 190 DAAX, doc. 429 (452–3). Vázquez Campos, “Nobleza, administración y política en el reinado de Alfonso X,” in an otherwise able synthesis of the alférez (230–5), gives the dates of Manuel’s alferecía as 2 October 1259–31 July 1274 (233, n. 92). 191 Burgos, 7 July 1277: “El infante don Manuel conf .... El infante don Johan, fijo del rey e su alférez, conf. El infante don Sancho, fijo mayor del rey e su mayordomo, con” in DAAX, doc. 434 (456–8). 192 See DA, doc. 6. 193 Chronicon de Cardeña, 23:374; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 209. 194 “[V]n cauallero de Panpliga que auia nombre Pero Martines e criara el ynfante don Manuel” in Funes, “La blasfemia,” Incipit 13 (1993): 60. 195 The full text, a medieval Castilian translation of the CG 1344, is published by Leonardo Funes, “La blasfemia,” Incipit 13 (1993): 58–62, who provides the most comprehensive investigation of this complex legend to date with an extensive historical and literary analysis of the subject. 196 Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 637–48, was the first to trace the ­origins of the legend though he was unaware of the CG 1344 text, noting ­nonetheless that Zurita, Anales, 4.47.193, had referenced the source as “un autor antiguo de las cosas de Portogal,” without naming him or his work. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 209–11, follows Mondéjar. 197 Cited by Funes, “La blasfemia,” Incipit 14 (1994): 82–3. 198 Sánchez de Arévalo, Compendiosa historia hispánica, quarta pars, capitulum V: “miles quidam dictus Petrus Martini de Pampliega, Deum timens, instructor et curam gerens infantis Manuelis.” 199 BNM Ms. 431 was first discovered and published in 1916 by Juan Ruiz de Obregón Retortillo, “Alfonso X el Emplazado,” 433–3. Lomax subsequently discovered three additional manuscripts that he designated A: Ms. 0.16 and B: Ms. 0.15 in the Colección Salazar y Castro of the Bib. de la Real Academia de la Historia, and C: Ms. BNM 712, editing and publishing Ms. A in 1976 in “Una crónica inédita de Silos,” 323–7. 200 I cite here the transcription edited by Funes, “La blasfemia del Rey Sabio,” Incipit 14 (1994): 72–3. Though Funes states that the first description and study of the manuscript was carried out by Galo Sánchez in 1929, it was in fact published and analysed by Obregón Retortillo, “Alfonso X El emplazado,” 433–3, in 1916, and later referenced by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 212, n. 27.



Notes to pages 70–2

383

201 156a–157a; see Bohigas, “La Visión de Alfonso X.” 202 Annales Hamburgenses, in MGH, 16.384, cited in Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2, n. 5289a; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 214; Denholm-Young, Richard of Cornwall, 88–9. 203 The first embassy in early fall was staffed by the archbishops Henry of Embrun and Rudolph of Tarantaise and the papal nuncio, Master ­Rostand; cf. Rymer, Foedera, 1.379, and Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9178. They were joined in early 1259 by Lawrence of St Martin, bishop of Rochester and the protonotary Arnold of Wetzlar in what Otto, “­Alexander IV,” calls “eine Aktion im grossen Stile, ... dass es den vereinigten Bemühungen dieser Männer gelungen ist, den Papst dahin zu bringen, dass er offen und unzweideutig für Richard sich erklärte. Der Winter 1258/1259 wäre demnach entscheidend geworden für die vollständige Sinnesänderung des Papstes” (83); see also Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9192, who cites Rymer, Foedera, 1.382. 204 Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 3.8.159; cited by Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 106 (1935): 132, and Alfonso X, 217. 205 Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 docs. 5498 (21 October) and 5500 (6 ­November); see also docs. 5488a (13 January 1257), 5490 (21 September 1257), 5496 (21 September 1258). In reference to these expenses, the CAX states that “esto e otras cosas atales que este rey fizo troxieron gran empobreçimiento en los regnos de Castilla e de León” (17.48); see also CAX, 24.83. 206 “Others bring you pounds sterling, we bring you books” in Giraldus Cambrensis, De rebus a se gestis, 18.119. 207 “Ne voyez-vous pas comment deux prélats en compétition dans leur élection se précipitent à la Curie où ils ont de grands frais et doivent dépenser pour des cadeaux? Après avoir affronté les difficultés et les dangers du voyage et du séjour, ils sont amenés à renoncer à leurs aspirations et se remettent dans les mains du pape, à la Curie; c’est alors que celui-ci confie l’église ou le monastère à un tiers. L’élu doit se présenter en Curie avec beaucoup d’argent, souvent avec 7,000, 8,000 ou 10,000 livres, qu’il a dû emprunter à des taux d’intérêts élevés à ceux-là mêmes qui s’appellent les marchands du pape, dont on dit généralement qu’ils encaissent son argent, le conservent et l’investissent de manière très ­rentable” in Dubois, De recuperatione Terre Sancte, 26; cited in Paravicini Bagliani, La cour des papes, 134–5. 208 Mansilla Reoyo, Iglesia castellano-leonesa, 341; González, Fernando III, 112. 209 Linehan’s observation, Spanish Church, 166, that he was a “faithless ­opportunist” who “took advantage of his brother the king’s temporary weakness” is perhaps too harsh, though Sancho was, indeed, a zealous champion of the ecclesiastical rights of his province and an individual who knew how to exploit the various divisions within the Spanish church.

384

Notes to pages 72–4

210 On 20 January 1259, Pope Alexander IV issued a command to the Order of Calatrava to render full obedience and respect to the archbishop of ­Toledo, in Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación pontificia de Alejandro IV, doc. 381 (352). 211 Linehan, Spanish Church, 169. 212 See Labande, “Ad limina,” 1.283–91. 213 Archivo Catedral de Toledo, I.5.C.1.67 (11 January 1259); Z.3.D.1.15 (26 January 1259); A.7.C.2.2 (28 January 1259); cited by Linehan, Spanish Church, 169–70. 214 On 7 March 1259 he is still referred to as electus (Archivo Catedral de Toledo, A.7.C.2.3a; caj. I.12.d.s.n.) and in a subsequent document dated 2 April 1259 (Archivo Catedral de Toledo, A.7.C.2.3), the pope, writing to Archbishop Juan Arias of Compostela, inferred that Sancho was ready to depart; cited by Linehan, Spanish Church, 170. 215 The brief is published by Villanueva, Documentos de la época de D. A ­ lfonso el Sabio, in MHE, doc. 67 (1.147–8), where he refers to the missive as a “Breve de Alejandro IV, recomendando a D. Sancho de Aragón, ­Arzobispo de Toledo, al rey D. Alfonso X,” confusing Alfonso’s brother Sancho with his brother-in-law Sancho de Aragón. Rodríguez de Lama, Documentacion pontificia de Alejandro IV, doc. 413 (374–5), refers to the same letter but does not publish it, stating that Fidel Fita mentioned it in “B.A.H., tomo XXVII, págs. 123–24” but that he was unable to locate it. 216 Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación pontificia de Alejandro IV, doc. 412 (314). 217 Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación pontificia de Alejandro IV, doc. 426 (387–90), has published not the original bull – which he mistakenly refers to as “doc. 424,” 386–7, and which he says is published by Fidel Fita, BRAH 27 (1895): 123–4, no. 20, though this citation does not refer to ­Sancho at all, but a copy of the original bull inserted in another issued to the bishop of Valencia on the same day. 218 “Privilegio del Rey D. Alfonso X eximiendo de pecho y pedido a cuarenta clérigos de las iglesias parroquiales de Ávila” in MHE, doc. 68 (1.149–51). 3. The Papal Curia in Anagni: 1259–60 1 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 225. 2 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 224–9; O’Callaghan, Cortes of Castile-León, 21; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 133–6. 3 “Toviemos por bien de fazer nuestras Cortes en la noble cibdad de Toledo sobre el fecho del imperio, et a estas Cortes vinieron D. Alfonso de ­Molina, nuestro tio, et nuestros hermanos, et los arzobispos, et los o ­ bispos, et ­todos nuestros ricos omes de Castiella et de Leon, et muchos omes buenos de todas las villas de nuestros regnos” in MHE, doc. 71 (1.154–5).



Notes to pages 75–6

385

4 “Tendría lugar preponderante en el Consejo, Don Sancho, electo de Toledo” (Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 225). 5 A papal bull confirming Remondo as archbishop of Seville was promulgated at Anagni on 7 May 1259, fully one month before the ­pontifical decree validating Sancho as archbishop of Toledo: ­“Alexander episcopus seruus seruorum Dei venerabili fratri archiepiscopus hispalensis eiusque successoribus canonice instituendis in perpetuam memoriam ... nos conuenit caritatis studio imminere que ad sedem apostolicam noscuntur specialius pertinere quocirca venerabilis in Xpo frater archiepiscope tuis iustis postulationibus clementer annuimus et ecclesiam hispalensem, ... sub beati Petri en nostra protectione suscipimus” in Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, doc. 104 (cvi–cix). Here, again, the term postulatio indicates that Remondo, as bishop of Segovia and a suffragan of the see of Toledo, was a subordinate of Archbishop-elect Sancho, a condition constituting a canonical impediment to his confirmation that would require Sancho’s consent. 6 Powicke, Thirteenth Century, 125. 7 Powicke, Thirteenth Century, 122–5. 8 Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, 3.448; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9189. 9 Annales de Burton, 469–70. Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9196, notes that the document edited by Rymer, Foedera, 1.384, erroneously gives April 21. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 241–2, says 22 April, mistaking the date of the document, “ii kal. Maii,” for “11 de las calendas de mayo.” 10 Fanta, “Ein Bericht,” 102; Otto, “Alexander IV,” 87. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 236, briefly mentions his mission, mistakenly referring to him as ­“cardenal,” but without citing his sources. Gofreddo, Godofredo, or Gottifredo, the nephew of Cardinal Riccardo Annibali, was not elected cardinal deacon of St. George ad Velum Aureum until 1261 during the pontificate of Urban IV; cf. Delle Donne, “Goffredo di Alatri.” Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación pontificia de Alejandro IV, 374–5, does not publish the papal document delivered to Alfonso by Goffredo, which he refers to as the “Bula dirigida al rey don Alfonso X el Sabio en la que parece que el papa promueve los intereses del rey de Castilla al trono de Alemania” because, he states, he was unable to locate it. Neither Ayala Martínez, D ­ irectrices fundamentales, 283, n. 271, nor Martínez, ­Alfonso X, 168, n. 21, appears to be aware of the source of the document since in this context both cite von Schoen, Alfonso X de Castilla, 133, a work providing no ­footnotes or documentation other than a minimal bibliography. 11 “Privilegio rodado de Alfonso X a la Catedral de Segovia” confirmed by “El Infante Don Manuel, hermano del Rey, e su Alferez, ... D. Frederic, D. Felipp, D. Ferrand, D. Loys, ... D. Alfonso Garcia Adelantado mayor de

386

12 13

14

15 16 17

18 19 20

21

22 23 24

Notes to pages 76–8 tierra de Murcia” in Colmenares, Historia de Segovia, 1.401–4; B ­ allesteros, “Itinerario,” 106 (1935): 141. “Privilegio del Rey D. Alfonso X eximiendo de pecho y pedido a cuarenta clérigos de las iglesias parroquiales de Ávila” in MHE, doc. 68 (1.149–51). “[Q]uilibet legitimus procurator contra nuncios regis Castelle, etsi dicti nuncii voluerint obtinere ex parte dicti regis Castellae quod sit ymperator hispanie, vel quod nos sive regna, et terras nostras ponerentur subiectione racione imperii vel qualibet alia racione.” The defective transcription of the text in MHE, doc. 69 (1.151) has now been accurately rendered by Linehan, Spain, 1157–1300, 129, n. 87. “Et quanto en lo nuestro, terniemos que ningun omne del mundo tan grande tuerto nunqua recibió de otro como nos recibriemos de vos” in MHE, doc. 80 (1.165–6). For Jaime’s negotiations with Manfred, see Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, 186, 298–302. Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9140 and n. 9196. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 231, 236, 240. A document dated 21 September 1258 describes Alfonso’s pledge to pay Hugh ten thousand maravedís a year for his vassalage; published in Pérard, Recueil, 491, and translated in Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 557. Cf. ­Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5496; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 230–1. See DA, doc. 7. Though the date is MCCXXIX and Chifflet appends “1229” in the margin, it is an obvious misreading of MMCCLIX (1259). See DA, doc. 8. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 240. O’Callaghan, Learned King, 206, supports ­Ballesteros’s claim, citing “Rodríguez de Lama, Alejandro IV, 382, 397, nos. 419 (22 April 1259), 433 (June)” (334, n. 40), though neither of these two documents contains any information concerning Infante Manuel’s delegation to Anagni. Remondo had assumed the title of archbishop-elect a year earlier in March 1258, when Infante Felipe renounced the miter of Seville and married Christina of Norway, but he had not yet been consecrated. On 7 May 1259, the pope despatched a bull to the cathedral chapter of Seville confirming various privileges to Archbishop Remondo and using the very same language he would employ on 17 June in his bull recognizing Sancho as archbishop of Toledo: Anagni, 7 May 1259, “Bula de Alejandro IV a la Catedral de Sevilla” in Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, doc. 104 (cvi–cix); see also in Ortiz de Zúñiga, Anales de Sevilla, 1.227–8. “Privilegio del Rey D. Alfonso X eximiendo de pecho y pedido a cuarenta clérigos de las iglesias parroquiales de Ávila,” in MHE, doc. 68 (1.149–51). MHE, doc. 70 (1.152–4). ACA, in Chabás, Episcopologio valentino, 318; cited by Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 167.



Notes to pages 78–80

387

25 Arch. General de Valencia, in Huici, Colección diplomática de Jaime I, 549, and cited in Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 218. 26 Documentos de la Iglesia Colegial de Santa María la Mayor, doc. 56 (2.331–5). 27 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 233–4. 28 BNM, MS 13.074, fols. 49r–50v. I thank José Manuel Ortega for his invaluable help in providing this information and various other items in notes 30 to 37. Linehan, Spanish Church, 316, n. 3, also cites a document from the Archivo Catedral de Toledo, X.2.B.2.Ia: “fuit quondam archidiaconus Valentinus,” and adds that Fray Martín was one of only two prelates belonging to the Dominican and Franciscan Orders to be elected by their cathedral chapters in the Peninsula during the thirteenth century. 29 “Seville, 2 marzo 1262, in DAAX, doc. 254 (281–2). 30 Arch. de la Catedral de Segovia, Colección Diplomática, 6–3 and 6–5. 31 Ubieto Arteta, Colección diplomática de Cuéllar, doc. 20 (59). 32 Arranz Guzmán, “Reconstrucción y verificación de las cortes castellanoleonesas,” 55. See also González Jiménez, “Cortes de Sevilla de 1261.” 33 AHN, Clero, Carpeta 1.977, no. 9. 34 Archivio Segreto Vaticano, registri vaticani, 27, fols. 132r–133r. 35 Archivio Segreto Vaticano, registri vaticani, 29, fol. 325v. 36 BNM, MS 19.345, fols. 146r–147v. 37 MHE, 2 November 1264, doc. 98 (1.216), and 12 March 1265, doc. 100 (1.219); Archivo Catedral de Segovia, B-248, fol. 45r: “dompnus Martinus qui obiit anno domini MCCLXV.” 38 Eubel, Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, 1.442, who incorrectly identifies him as a Franciscan, also affirms that he died in 1265. 39 MHE, doc. 81 (1.166–9). 40 Ballesteros, Alfonso X: “tal vez era un hijo de ganancia de Alfonso X” (208); “arcediano de Trastámara en la iglesia compostelana y notario del rey, era nombrado capellán del Papa” (343); “Un sobrino del rey” (426); “tío de Don Sancho” (970). In fact, Juan Alfonso de Molina, illegitimate son of Alfonso de Molina, younger brother of Fernando III, and a first cousin of Alfonso X and Manuel, had recently been dispensed from his “­ defectus natalium” by Pope Alexander IV in a decree issued on 24 January 1259 at the behest of the king, a matter most likely pursued in Anagni by ­Archbishop-elect Sancho, who was there at the time; see Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación Alejandro IV, doc. 380 (351); O’Callaghan, Learned King, 51. 41 Toledo, 27 July 1259, MHE, doc. 68 (1.149–51). 42 Segovia, 13 September 1258, in MHE, doc. 66 (1.144–7). We also have a papal bull issued in Viterbo, 13 November 1257, in which “Alejandro IV comisiona al arcediano de Trastámara de la diócesis de Compostela, para que confirme la provisión de un beneficio en la ciudad de Oviedo y haga entregar los frutos del mismo a Juan Martínez, clérigo de coro, que había

388

43

44 45

46

47 48 49 50 51 52 53

Notes to pages 80–1 sido nombrado por el obispo” in Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación ­Alejandro IV, doc. 315 (299), but the archdeacon is not named so we cannot make a definite connection between this figure and Maestre Juan. Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, 14 December 1260, doc. 144 (cl–cli): “Et sobresto nuestro hermano el Rey don Alfonso por parar agora ésta desauenencia, et por toller escándalo que podrie nascer sobreste fecho entre nos et el Arçobispo de Seuilla, enuió nos don Suero Pérez Obispo de Çamora, et don Johan Alfonso, Arcediano de Santiago su notario del Regno de León.” Colleción diplomática medieval de la Orden de Alcántara, 15 March 1261, doc. 306 (194–5). Raynaldi, Annales ecclesiastici, 1263, 38; trans. Mondéjar, Memorias ­históricas, 173; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5513. See also “Poderes ­otorgados por Alfonso X a sus embajadores cerca del Pontífice (­Seville, 1 February 1263)” in Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 107 (1935): 381, and ­Alfonso X, 341. Registres d’Urbain IV, doc. 350 (2.165–8). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, who mistakenly dates the document “11 kalendas de septiembre de 1263” or 22 August 1263, instead of 27 August, publishes pertinent passages of the missive with many inaccuracies on pp. 343–4, which I offer here with the appropriate corrections: “Ex parte vero supradicti regis, per venerabilem fratrem nostrum Garsiam Silvensem, et fratrem Dominicum Abulensem episcopos, et dilectos filios magistros Johannem, capellanum nostrum, ­archidiaconum Compostellanum, et Radulphum de Podiobonizi, ipsius regis procuratores, actores et negotiorum gestores generales et ­speciales, ita quod occupantis non sit melior conditio, mandatum habentes ab ­eodem, vel a te, rege, ad petendum pro ipso, vel te, et suo, vel tuo, nomine a nobis et predictis fratribus nostris coronam imperii, et assignari sibi, vel tibi, diem ad recipiendum ipsam, et ad tractandum jura sua, vel tua, et imperii, et quicquid honori suo, vel tuo, expedire viderent, sive in ordinario, sive in extraordinario judicio ageretur” (165). The document may also be found in Pertz, Epistolae saeculi XIII, doc. 560 (3.544–9). Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9354, 9355, 9356; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 342–4. Registres d’Urbain IV, 23 August 1264, doc. 2080 (3.334–5); 25 August 1264, doc. 2093 (3.337–8), cited by Linehan, Spanish Church, 260–1, n. 3. CAX, 21.68. Murcia, 28 April 1272, MHE, doc. 128 (1.278–87). Guiraud, Registres de Grégoire X, 26 December 1272, doc. 110 (38). Escalona, 28 December 1272, MHE, doc. 130 (1.289–91): “Maestre Ferrando, Electo de Oviedo e Notario del Rey en Leon.” Otto, “Alexander IV,” 88; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 242; Lomax, “Padre,” 170.



Notes to pages 81–4

389

54 Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 9 (14–16); his ­signature is absent from the same charter in MHE, doc. 70 (1.152–4). 55 In Rymer, Foedera, 1.391; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5362. 56 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, affirms that “la vía marítima desde la capital ­andaluza era la más breve a Roma, ... por el menor espacio a recorrer” (339). 57 See Ballesteros, Alfonso X, “Antecedentes de la campaña africana” (258–62); Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, 118–21, 266. 58 Linehan, Spanish Church, 174–7 et passim. 59 O’Callaghan, Learned King, 157–9. 60 See Sibilia, Alessandro IV, 217. Sibilia also reports that the famous scientist Albertus Magnus, former tutor of Infante Manuel’s brothers Felipe and Sancho during their sojourn in Paris in 1245, was at Anagni from 1256 to 1259 (246). Was he still there when Manuel arrived? See also Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 129. 61 See DA, doc. 9. 62 Lomax, “Padre,” 170. 63 “Adv. et donatio Ecclesiae spectat. ad Abb. S. Edm, et pertinent Ecclesiae eidem 1. mes. 53 acr. terrae 1. acr. pasturae et 1 acr. bosci cum pertinentiis suis ex dotatione Abbatum S. Edm. – Abbas S. Edm. et Conv. Cap. Dñi. de Cokefeude” in Babington, History of Cockfield, 31. My thanks to William Wexler, Public Service Archivist, Suffolk Record Office (Lowestoft Branch), Central Library, for providing a photocopy of the pertinent pages in Babington’s work. The same information was also kindly supplied by Mrs. V.E. Lloyd, who is currently writing a new history of Cockfield. 64 Westminster, 25 May 1226, in Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 2.38. 65 Woodstock, 12 June 1232: “Rex commisit Roberto de Cokefeld comitatus Norfolchie et Suffolchie custodiendos quamdiu regi placuerit. Et ­mandatum est archiepiscopis, episcopis etc. de predictis comitatibus quod ei tamquam vicecomiti regis in omnibus que ad predictos comitatus pertinent, sint intendentes et respondentes, sicut predictum est” in Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 2.480. 66 Merton, 11 April 1246: Adam de Cocfeud receives protection with clause volumus to go to Ireland with John son of Geoffrey on the king’s service; in Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 3.477. 67 Anagni, 31 October 1256, cited in Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain and Ireland, vol. I, papal letters (1198–1304), p. 339. 68 Westminster, February 1257, in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 10.117. Westminster, 6 June 1257: Johannes de Cokfeld, “iusticiarius regis,” is summoned to appear before the Council of Gipewich in the county of Suffolk on the day after Michaelmas; in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 10.134. 69 Westminster, 8 November 1257, in Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 4.602.

390

Notes to page 84

70 Winchester, 10 July 1258: John de Cokefeud ordered to collect three ­thousand marks from the account of William de Valencia held by the ­abbot and convent of Wautham, in Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 4.641; Westminster, 2 August 1258: John de Cokfeld, the king’s clerk, is ordered to take nine hundred marks from the account of Warin ­Muntchenese held in keeping by William de Valentia, the king’s brother, in the ­convent of Wautham, in Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 4.643. William was the first-born son of Hugh of La Marche or Lusignan. who had married King John’s widow, Isabel of Angoulême, in 1220; see Snellgrove, The ­Lusignans in England, 53 et passim. 71 Westminster, 31 July 1259: “Appointment of John de Cokefeld to hear the plaints, trespasses and injuries done by Richard de Clare, earl of G ­ loucester and Hertford, and his bailiffs and men to any persons in the counties of ­Essex, Norfolk and Suffolk, and make amends for the same according to law and the custom of the realm” in Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 5.53. 72 We have a curious document from Westminster, 26 November 1259, that refers to the arrest and detention of John of Heslerton in the king’s prison at York for the murder of a certain “Clude”; he was released on bail after presenting letters from the Viscount of York: “apud ­Westmonasterium xxvi die Novembris 1259: De ponendo per ballium. Johannes de ­Heselerton, detentus in prisona regis Eboraci pro morte Clude unde appellatus est, habet litteras vicecomiti Ebor quod ponatur per ballium. Teste ut supra” (2.17), in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 2.17. 73 Saint Dinis, 14 January 1260: “Mandatum est Edwardo de W ­ estmonasterio quod de croceo samitto, quod rex per dilectum clericum suum J­ ohannem de Kokefeud, ei transmittit, fieri faciat sine d ­ ilacione unam casulam et unam capam de choro cum decenti apparatu de latis aurifrigiis cum quadam nuschia competenti ad dictam capam ita quod rex eas habeat promptas contra adventum suum ad faciendum inde o ­ blaciones suas apud Westmonasterium in eodem adventu suo. Et m ­ andatum est ­Johannis de Crackale, thesaurario regis, quod ea que ad operaciones earundem necessaria fuerint eidem Edwardo habere faciat indilate. Et, cum rex scriverit custum, breve suum de Liberate e­ idem ­thesaurario inde habere faciet” in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 11.233–4. 74 Saint Maur-des-Fossés, 6 March 1260: “Mandatum est Edwardo de ­Westmonasterio quod quamdam albam de alba dyaspra fieri faciat, et illas preciosas paruras que sunt in quadam veteri albam apud ­Westmonasterium poni faciat super eandem novam albam et de aliis paruris provideat ad veterem albam ita quod rex predictam albam ­novam habeat promptam cum capa de choro et casula quas nuper ­fieri precepit de croceo samito quem nuper prefato Edwardo misit per ­Johannem de Kokefeld’, clericum suum. Et hoc nullatenus omittat. Et,



Notes to pages 84–5

75

76

77

78 79

80

391

cum rex scriverit custum illud reddi faciet” in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 11.246. Westminster, 24–25 July 1260: “Letter from King Henry III to John de Cokefeud instructing him to refrain from instigating a judicial inquest into the case of novel disseisin in the suit which Robert Pudifat has brought against John de Mersche of the church of Berchamsted” in ­Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 11.185–7. Westminster, 13 August 1260: “Mandatum est Ricardo de Munfichet, ­senescallo foreste regis Essex’, quod in eodem foresta faciat haber ­Johanni Mansell’ quatuor cervos et Johanni de Kokefeud duos damos de dono regis” in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 11.100. John must have been an avid hunter judging by the permission given him two years later by the king to hunt in the royal forests of Hatfeld and Lancaster: Saint Germain-des-Prés, 18 August 1262: “Mandatum est Ricardo de Muntfichet senescallo foreste (sue cancelled) quod in foresta de Hatfeld faciat habere Johanni de Cokefeld tres damos de dono regis” in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 12.148. Saint Germain-des-Prés, 29 August 1262: ­“Mandatum est Roberto de Nevill’, justiciario foreste ultra Trentam, quod in foresta regis de Lancastr’ faciat habere Johanni de Cokefeld’ ­clerico tres cervos de dono” in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 12.149. St. Germain-de-Prés, 15 August 1262: “Charter, granting at the instance of John Mansell, treasurer of York, to Henry de Cokefeld and his heirs, free warren in their demesne lands of Cokefeld and Brudefeld, provided that the lands be now within the forest .... Witnesses ... John Mansell, treasurer of York” in Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 6.728. Cf. Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2 n. 5289, 5292a, 5382, 1178, 11872, 13926, 13930, 13963, 13973, 14035, 14250. St. Paul, London, 6 July 1267: “Rex vicecomiti et coronatoribus Norf’ salutem. Quia accepimus per inquisicionem, quam per dilectum et ­fidelem nostrum Johannem de Cokefeud fieri fecimus, quod Walterius de Tirston, clericus, propria temeritate ductus irruit super gladium Thome filii Radulphi de Karleton’ tunc constabularii civitatis Norwic’, ... nos ad instanciam venerabilis patris Ottoboni Sancti Adriani Diaconi Cardinalis, Apostolice sedis legati, perdonavimus eidem Thome sectam pacis ­nostre que ad nos pertinet pro morte predicta et firmam pacem nostram ei ­concedimus, ita tamen quod stet recto in curia nostra si quis versus eum inde loqui voluerit” in Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 13.318–19. Copinger, County of Suffolk, cites “John de Haselarton, parson of the Ch. of Cockfield, against the Abbot of S. Edmund’s and others, touch[ing] a tenement” in Calendar of Patent Rolls Edward I, 4 EdwI 17d, 20d (2.97), which would correspond to the first four years of Edward’s reign, though this reference is not corroborated by either the published records

392

81

82

83

84

85

Notes to pages 85–6 of the Close or Patent Rolls from that period. I thank William Wexler, Public Service Archivist, Suffolk Record Office, for providing me with this citation. Westminster, 17 May 1282: “Herlerton [Heslerton], which are the inheritance of Richard, son and heir of John son of Alan, a minor in the king’s wardship” in Calendar of Close Rolls Edward I, 2.83–4. “Son of Alan” may well be a scribal error for “Adam,” a name well documented in the ­Heslerton line, while “Alan” is not. “Mr. Johannes Haselarton ad praes Edmundi Abbis ob. 1283. Ex inquisitionibus sup jure patronatus hujus Ecclesiae inter Comit. Oxon et Abb. S. Edmundi 1283 (in Reb. Eccl. Buriensis, penes Mr. Novell f:31–32)” in Babington, History of Cockfield, 32. In The Tanner Manuscripts, ed. Hawkins, Thomas Tanner, bishop of Asaph (1732–35), lists the incumbents of Cockfield and states that John of Heslerton died in 1283; my thanks to Liz Wigmore, Bury St. Edmonds Record Office, Suffolk, for this information. See DA, doc. 10. Lomax, “Padre,” 170, errs in stating that this bull was published two days before the first since it was, in fact, published two days after. Paravicini Bagliani, La cour des papes: “Faire partie du cubiculum du pape était considéré comme un honneur. Pendant longtemps, cette charge était réservée aux adolescents de familles aristocratiques romaines et servait de tremplin pour une future carrière au sein de l’administration ­pontifical. Malgré l’interdiction de Grégoire la Grand de confier cette charge à des laïcs, l’emploi de ces ‘cubiculaires’ (cubicularii laici) se poursuivit, tandis que d’autres chambriers pouvaient appartenir au clergé et étaient appelés ‘cubiculaires tonsurés’ (cubicularii tonsurati). Leur ­prestige curial était élevé. Ils recevaient en effet de l’archidiacre du palais de Latran le droit d’utiliser du velours de lin pour décorer la selle de leurs chevaux. Au début du XIIIe siècle, le recrutement des chambriers semble se transformer radicalement. Ils sont tour à tour des frères appartenant à différents ordres monastiques et chevaleresques (Templiers, chevaliers de l’ordre de Saint-Jean-de-Jérusalem), mais aussi des moines noirs ­(bénédictines). Généralement au nombre de deux, ils dorment devant la chambre du papa. Si le pape recevait une personnalité importante en dehors du consistoire, un chambrier devait se tenir à la droite du pape et l’autre à sa gauche” (73–4). In this context, Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, observes that “[l]as líneas de actuación alfonsí en este sentido corren en tres direcciones: en primer lugar, asegurar, a través de una activa política foral y del otorgamiento de amplias exenciones, el incremento de la población cristiana y su permanencia, especialmente en los lugares más estratégicos



Notes to pages 86–7

86

87

88 89 90

91

393

del reino, como la propia Murcia, ... en segundo lugar, dotar generosamente a la diócesis exenta de Cartagena, conformando cuidadosamente los límites jurisdiccionales de su obispado, cuyo titular sería inequívocamente leal a la Corona; en tercer lugar, favorecer el afianzamiento de la Orden de Santiago en tan estratégico territorio con el fin de poseer en él guarniciones permanentes que no sólo aseguren el control de la zona sino que lo protejan de eventuales acciones aragonesas” (214, n. 113). The statue of Infante Manuel in the upper cloister of the Burgos ­Cathedral represents a mature Don Manuel wearing the traditional leather cap and cape of the knights of the Order of Santiago, the same distinctive items worn in the fifteenth-century images of Álvaro de Luna and the Doncel de Sigüenza; see Álvaro de Luna, altarpiece by ­Sancho de Zamora, Chapel of Santiago, Toledo Cathedral; and Doncel de Sigüenza, Martín Vázquez de Arce, by Sebastián de Almonacid, Sigüenza ­Cathedral. In 1280, Alfonso X merged the Order of Santiago with the ­Orden de Santa María de España or the Orden de la Estrella. A comparison of the cloister statue of Infante Manuel with the image of the knights of the Orden de la Estrella found in Cantiga 78 of the Florentine Codex reveals a striking similarity in their costumes (Figs. 17, 18). O’Callaghan, Learned King, 206, n. 40, records Manuel’s embassy, but his reference to the documents published by Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación Alejandro IV, 22 April 1259, doc. 419 (382), and June 1259, doc. 433 (397), is not germane. In Winkelmann, “Ungedruckte Urkunden,” doc. 17 (99–103). In Winkelmann, “Ungedruckte Urkunden,” doc. 17 (99–103). Letter from Clement IV to papal legate Ottobonus of St. Adrian (Viterbo, 30 April 1266) in Posse, Analecta Vaticana, doc. 15 (139–41); letter from Clement IV to Alfonso X (Viterbo, 30 April 1266) in Raynaldi, Annales ­ecclesiastici, 36; cited in Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9675, 9676. Magister Rodolphus/Rodulfus/Radulphus de Podio Bonizi/­ Podiobonizo/Podiobovingo or Rodolfo di Poggibonsi appears to have been Frederick II’s imperial notary during the two years prior to the ­emperor’s death in 1250. See the entries in Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2, n. 3735, 3739, 3829, 3830, 4570, 4640, 5488c, 5513, 14761. This is the ­title by which Alfonso addresses him (“magistrum Rodulfum de Podio ­Bonizi nostrum notarium”) in a document dated Seville, 1 February 1263, appointing him royal procurator along with bishops Martín of León, García of Silves, and the archdeacon of Compostela, Juan Alfonso, cited in ­Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5513 and translated by Mondéjar, ­Memorias históricas, 173–4. However, his status as royal ambassador to the Curia dates from at least a year earlier when Urban IV wrote to Alfonso recognizing “dilectus filius, magister Rod., notarius tuus, a te pro imperii

394

92

93 94 95 96 97 98

Notes to pages 87–90 Romani negotio ad sedem apostolicam destinatus, vir utique industrius et sedulus tui zelator honoris, ad tui exaltationem nominis et magnitudinis tue laudem proposuit in nostra et fratrum nostrorum presentia constitutus” as the king’s legate concerning the matter of empire in Viterbo, 17 April 1262, Registres d’Urbain IV, doc. 93 (2.28). Again, on 27 August 1263, Urban IV wrote to Richard of Cornwall about the Castilian embassy to Anagni: “Ex parte vero supradicti regis, per venerabilem fratrem nostrum Garsiam Silvensem, et fratrem Dominicum Abulensem episcopos, et ­dilectos filios magistros Johannem, capellanum nostrum, archidiaconum Compostellanum, et Radulphum de Podiobonizi, ipsius regis procuratores, actores et negotiorum gestores generales et speciales” in Registres d’Urbain IV, doc. 350 (2.165–8). Letter from Clement IV to Alfonso X (Viterbo, 8 May 1267) in Raynaldi, Annales ecclesiastici, 1267.22, cited by Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,3 n. 9775. Fanta, “Ein Bericht.” Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 226. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 240. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 454–8. See DA, doc. 11; Fanta, “Ein Bericht,” 102. Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 52 (69–71). Cosignatories: “Don Sancho ... Don Frederich ... Don Felipp ... Don ­Alfonsso Garcia, adelantado mayor de la frontera ... El infante don ­Manvel ermano del rey et su alférez.” 4. Dominion in Murcia and the “Tierra De Don Manuel”: 1260–72

1 Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 52 (69–71); González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 137. 2 Ágreda, 11 marzo 1260: “El Infante don Emanuel ermano del rey e su alférez confirma ... Don Sancho, arçobispo de Toledo, chanceler del rey, confirma. Don Remondo, arçobispo de Sevilla, confirma. Don Alfonso de Molina confirma. Don Frederich, confirma. Don Felipp, confirma” in ­Serrano, Fuentes para la historia de Castilla, 2.101–4. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 254, makes a strong case for the presence of Violante. 3 “Don Sancho, arçobispo de Toledo e Chançeler del rrey, conf. ... Don Frederich, conf. Don Felipp, conf. ... El ifante don Manuel, ermano del rrey e su alférez, confirma ... Don Fray Martín, obispo de Segouia, conf.” in Colleción diplomática del Concejo de Burgos, doc. 35 (113–16). 4 Sevilla, 27 de julio: “Alfonso X nombra adelantado mayor de la mar a don Juan García, su mayordomo” in DAAX, doc. 231 (253–4): “Don Manuel, hermano del rey y su alférez, conf.” See also Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 273.



Notes to pages 90–1

395

5 O’Callaghan, Learned King, 182, mistakes him for his father “Abu ­Zakariya,” who died in 1249. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 260, 267, estimated that Fadrique departed Spain for Africa in 1259 and that ­“Seguramente había salido de España en desgracia del rey” (267). However, we ­currently have Fadrique’s signature on royal documents during every year from 1252 to 1260, with the last one in Soria, 12 April 1260, so that he could not have left for Africa until after that date, returning to Spain only in 1272. At the same time, González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 140, ­asserts that Fadrique confirms a royal privilege on 9 May 1260, but the description of the only document issued by Alfonxo X on that date that he publishes in his DIAX, doc. 1559 (259), does not correspond with the description of the document given by the author in Alfonso X, 140, n. 34. Inexplicably, Martínez, Alfonso X, states that “[e]n 1255 se unió a su hermano Enrique para formar parte de la conspiración antialfonsina; al fracasar la conspiración, se vio obligado a tener que refugiarse bajo la protección del sultán de Túnez, como sucedió también a su hermano Enrique” (409). Though there were suspicions Fadrique may have been involved in ­Enrique’s uprising, nothing was ever proved and, as ­Ballesteros so aptly remarked, “la astucia del infante le libró de complicaciones peligrosas” (272). ­Contrary to Martínez’s claim that both infantes were consequently obliged to seek refuge under the protection of the sultan of Tunis, ­Mohammed I al-Mustansir was a vassal of the infantes’ cousin, King Manfred of Sicily, and a staunch ally of Jaime I of Aragón who had recently written to Alfonso that he would only support the Castilian’s African crusade on the condition that he not attack his friend, “Miralmomonino, señor de Tunez ... per la amor que el nos faz” (MHE, doc. 75, 1.158–9). For the two perennially disaffected princes who felt betrayed by their brother’s actions, al-Mustansir’s court would be a base from which they could effectively subvert Alfonso’s ambitions in Italy while enriching themselves as mercenaries in the process, and they freely chose to ally themselves with the Saracens in this regard. Fadrique, then, had left Spain of his own accord sometime after April 1260 and was not expelled with Enrique in 1255. 6 The most comprehensive work to date on the maestre is López Fernández, Pelay Pérez Correa (2010). 7 Lomax, Orden de Santiago, 283. 8 Chaps. 1060, 1065, 1069, 1071–2, 1081–2, 1087–8, 1117. 9 Pp. 2.802–8. 10 Moxó Montoliu, “El enlace de Alfonso de Castilla,” 69–110. 11 “Letter from Alfonso to Pelay Pérez,” Burgos, 5 September 1243, in Aguado de Córdova et al., Bullarium equistris ordinis S. Iacobi, 117. 12 Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, 124.

396

Notes to pages 91–3

13 Registres d’Innocent IV, 24 September 1245, doc. 1511 (1.230); Quintana Prieto, Documentación Inocencio IV, doc. 216 (1.251–2); Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 273–4; López Fernández, Pelay Pérez, 148–54. 14 DAAX, 10 June 1253, doc. 37 (33–4); O’Callaghan, Learned King, 167. 15 Though Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 273–4, maintains the importance of the papal grant of Salé to the Order of Santiago, O’Callaghan, Learned King, 172, doubts it played a role in Alfonso’s decision; Ayala Martínez, ­Directrices fundamentales, 277–9, considers the campaign to have successfully demonstrated Alfonso’s ability to strike a blow at will against the ­Islamic forces of North Africa, and López Fernández, Pelay Pérez, 148–54, remarks that “[u]no de los mecanismos empleados por Alfonso X para alcanzar prestigio internacional fue propugnar la cruzada africana; tal empresa tenía a la vez una finalidad ideológica y estratégica ya iniciada por su padre, pero don Alfonso no pudo afrontarla con ciertas garantías hasta 1260 ... nos resulta difícil pensar que los santiagustas no fuesen ­empleados en la expedición de Salé.” 16 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 274–84; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 172–4. 17 DAAX, docs. 233 (255–7), 234 (257–9): “Don Manuel, hermano del rey e su alférez, conf.” 18 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 280; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 136–41. 19 DAAX, doc. 233 (255–7). 20 DAAX, doc. 234 (257–9). 21 The document dated Seville, 14 December, is contained within another dated Camas, 19 January 1266: “Carta de D. Sancho de Aragón Electo de Toledo confirmando otra de su antecesor” in Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, doc. 144 (cl–cli): “Testigos desto, el Infante don ffelip, el Infante don Manuel, el Infante don Loys, et Obispos et Ricos ommes muchos.” See Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 292–3. 22 Rivera Garretas, Encomienda, doc. 213 (420–2); López Fernández, Pelay Pérez, 323–5. 23 See DA, doc. 12. 24 See Rivera Garretas, Encomienda, “La política adquisitiva de la encomienda de Uclés” (91–119) and “La política adquisitiva del priorato de Uclés” (119–69). 25 Nevertheless, Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, ­report that the property came into the hands of the Order “por un p ­ roceso que desconocemos” (51), and it is possible that the Order obtained the castle in 1214 at the death of its founder, Diego’s grandfather of the same name, Diego López II de Haro, “el Bueno.” 26 “[L]as presas de los molinos,” 1.555, 585. 27 See Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, 49, n. 69 and map on p. 50.



Notes to pages 93–6

397

28 Peñafiel, 20 December 1283: “Testamento de Infante Manuel,” in Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 35 (139–44). 29 Loaysa, Crónica, 20. 30 “[F]izo don Alfonso, mio hermano, en vida del rey don Alfonso et de mio padre, muchos caualleros, non seyendo el cauallero, et sennalada mente fizo a Garçi Ferrandes Malrique, padre deste Johan Garcia Malrique que es oy biuo” (1.133); with regard to these two individuals, see Salazar y Castro, Casa de Lara, 1.304–15. 31 Her extensive geneology may be found in José Mattoso, ed., Livro de Linhagens do Conde D. Pedro, 1.91315–18; 9C15–17; 1.10C11–14; 1.10E12; 1.1oF13–14. 32 Published in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel: Tarragona, 28 October 1306, doc. 158 (341); Escalona, 14 November 1306, doc. 159 (341); Coimbra, 4 December 1306, doc. 161 (342–3). 33 DAAX: 11 January, doc. 237 (260–2); López Ferreiro, Fueros municipales de Santiago, 21 February, 1.248, and cited with excerpts by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 294–5; DAAX, 24 March, doc. 239 (264–5); 31 March, doc. 240 (266–7); 30 May, doc. 243 (270–1); 28 June, doc. 246 (273–5). 34 López Ferreiro, Fueros municipales de Santiago, 1.248, cited by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 295; see also González Jiménez, “Cortes de Sevilla de 1261.” 35 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 313–20; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 146–52. 36 Rivera Recio, Los arzobispos de Toledo, 59. 37 San Torcaz, 5 October 1261: “Carta de don Sancho, arzobispo de Toledo, declarando haber recibido las sumas de maravedís que debían darle en el obispado de Cuenca por derecho en los diezmos (Archivo Catedral de Cuenca)” in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, doc. 498 (1083), which is cited but not published; Seville, 23 junio 1261: “Privilegio del Rey D. Alfonso X ... al consejo de Escalona”: “D. Sancho, Arzobispo de Toledo et Canceler del Rey, conf.” in MHE, doc. 86 (1.187–91). 38 The Tentative Dictionary of Medieval Spanish (TDMS), gives “menazon (manazon) [fr. menaison],” but Körting, Lateinisch-romanisches Wörterbuch, provides a different etymology: “manatio, -onem ... ital ... menagione, Durchfall; prov. menazo-s; altfrz. menoison” (624). Corominas, Diccionario crítico etimológico, does not reference the term at all. 39 Documentos del Archivo general de Madrid, 1.85–92. 40 MHE, doc. 84 (1.181–3). 41 Loperráez, Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma, doc. 65 (3.188–90). 42 Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 61 (79–80). 43 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 346, and “Itinerario,” 107 (1935): 56. 44 Muntaner, Crónica, chap. 17 (34–5). 45 “Et non fagades ende al, si non mando a Dia Sanchez de Bustamante, adelantado maior en el regno de Murcia por el infante don Manuel, mio

398

46 47

48 49

50 51 52 53 54 55 56

57

58 59 60 61 62

Notes to pages 96–9 hermano, et a otro qualquier que este y por el” in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 89 (105). MHE, doc. 10 (1.19–21). See Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 194. According to Ortuño Sánchez-Pedreño, El adelantado de la corona de Castilla, the essential ­difference between the merino and the adelantado are that “el merino no tiene poder de juzgar, sino sólo de desarrollar aquellas tareas ­necesarias para que se cumplan las sentencias dictadas por los adelantados u otros jueces y para que la paz judicial se instaure en los territorios de la ­corona ... Dentro del oficio genérico de adelantado, desde el siglo XIII nos ­encontramos con el adelantado mayor, que se sitúa como suprema ­autoridad política y judicial del adelantamiento” (17–18). DAAX, doc. 212 (234–7). Murcia, 12 June 1272: “Alfonso X ordena a don Enrique Pérez, adelantado mayor del reino de Murcia, que entienda en la demanda presentada por doña Ramoneta,” in DIAX, doc. 2440 (418). MHE, doc. 128 (1.278–87). Cuéllar, 3 August 1274, in MHE, doc. 135 (1.297–303). Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 217. Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 89 (105). Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 153 (162–3). Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 74 (68). Alzira, 28 November 1281 in ACA, Reg. 50, fols. 200v–201r and Alzira, 6 December 1281, in ACA, Reg. 50, fol. 205v. Neither Cascales, Ballesteros, nor Torres Fontes was aware of these documents. See Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 62, ­Sevilla, 22 April 1262: “Alfonso X designa a su hermano Manuel como ­adelantado del reino de Murcia y le concede por juro de heredad las v ­ illas de Elche, Crevillente, Aspe y valle de Elda”; D. Lomax, “­ Padre”, 167; García Díaz, “Señoríos murcianos del infante don Manuel,” 190; P ­ retel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, 25; Poveda Navarro, “Villa et castiello de Ella,” 72; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 157. On the other hand, Ayala Martínez, Directrices fundamentales, clearly states that “[n]o hay fundamento documental que atestigüe el presunto nombramiento del infante don Manuel como Adelantado Mayor de M ­ urcia en 1262, tal y como afirma A. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 346” (320, n. 369). Seville, 11 September, in MHE, doc. 89 (1.195–200). DAAX, doc. 265 (294–5). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 368. See Torres Fontes, Reconquista de Murcia, 43–57; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 163–6; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 166–72. Toledo, 6 April, “Confirman D. Alfonso de Molina ... D. Federico ... D. ­Enrico ... D. Manuel ... D. Fernando ... D. Felipp, Electo de Sevilla ... D. Sancho, Electo de Toledo” in B. Chaves, Apuntamiento legal, 8r–8v.



Notes to pages 99–110

399

63 Llibre dels feits: “perdé lo rei de Castella dins tres setmanes tres-cents entre ciutats e viles grans, e castells,” 378.319. 64 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 374. 65 Kinkade, “Don Juan Manuel’s Father,” 59–66; O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María, 56–7 et passim. 66 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 375. 67 González Jiménez and González Gómez, Repartimiento de Jerez de la Frontera, docs. 541–42 (61); doc. 549 (62); docs. 557–9 (63). The Infante’s feudal ­retainer, Felises, “ome de don Manuel,” was also given land: docs. 541–2 (61); docs. 557–8 (63). 68 DAAX, doc. 295 (319–21). 69 DAAX, doc. 296 (321–2). See the complex process of occupation and ­repopulation of Arcos de la Frontera in González Jiménez, La repoblación del reino de Sevilla, 167–97. 70 Bullarium ordinis militiae de Calatrava, doc. 5 (123–5). 71 Llibre dels feits, chap. 379. 72 Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 66 (83–5). 73 Pretel Marín, Conquista, 136; Fuster Ruiz, “Albacete,” 127. 74 DAAX, doc. 304 (328–9). 75 See DA, doc. 13. 76 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 386. 77 Llibre dels feits, chap. 406 (337); Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 379. 78 MHE, doc. 103 (1.229). 79 Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 109 (1936): 385. 80 “Puede afirmarse ... que el Infante Don Manuel fue el personaje de más importancia, la figura de más relieve y el hacedor supremo de nuestras instituciones. Obtuvo para Elche todos los privilegios que los reyes ­castellanos habían concedido a Toledo, Sevilla y Murcia. Alcanzó ­confirmaciones de su hermano, ... de muchos otros privilegios que hubo de dictar para Elche exclusivamente; y fue el generoso donante que una vez en posesión de Elche, ... se desprendió en beneficio nuestro, de gran parte de su feudo con el fin de que Elche moro, cuyos infortunados ­habitantes acababan de rendirse ... no sufriera las terribles ­consecuencias por que pasa toda población conquistada” in Ibarra y Ruiz, Riego en Elche, 67–8. 81 For a concise summary of the dates concerning this rather confusing epoch in the various annals that deal with the matter, see Ballesteros, ­Alfonso X, 396–403. 82 “Et el rey don Alfonso fue a la çibdat de Murçia et este Alboaquez e los moros que estauan en ella entregaron gela, e dexó en el alcáçar al infante don Manuel su hermano” (15.43). 83 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 397. Torres Fontes, Reconquista de Murcia, 145, repeats the error, which is rectified by González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 185, who closely follows Jaime I’s narrative.

400

Notes to pages 110–12

84 DAAX, doc. 312 (334–41). 85 Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 30 (27–8); MHE, doc. 105 (1.231–2). 86 “Et, mal pecado, dizen que lo que la infanta temia quel acaeçio: que la razon de su muerte fue vn tabaque de çerezas quel envio la reyna, su hermana” (Armas, 1.133). 87 “[S]uper sponsalibus & matrimonio contrahendis inter dictum dominum Emanuelem & nobilem dominam Constantiam filiam primogenitam & heredem dicti domini Gastonis & dominae Amatae, necnon super ­sponsalibus contrahendis inter dominum Alfonsum filium dicti domini Emanuelis fratris nostri, & Inclitae Infantissae dominae Constantiae fi ­ liae illustris regis Aragonum ex vna parte, & inter dominam Guillelmam fi ­ liam dicti domini Gastonis, & dominae Amatae ex altera ..., & consumment matrimonium ... vsque ad festum Assumptionis Beatae Maria virginis, mensis Augusti proxime venture” in Marca, Histoire de Béarn, 7.12.617. 88 Though Zurita, Anales, 3.60.601, and others claim Alfonso’s marriage to Constance took place several days before his death and was never ­consummated, de Sagarra, “Noticias y documentos inéditos referentes al infante don Alfonso,” publishes the infante’s will, given on 8 August 1256, in which Constance appears as “domina Constancia uxor nostra” (296). 89 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 239. 90 Zurita, Anales, 3.78.685. Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, chap. 43 (263), cites the marriage contract dated 4 April 1270; see also Flórez, Reinas, 2.534, and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 511. 91 “[E]ll lliura tota la sua part al rey de Castella, son gendre, per ço que de tot ensemps se pogués ajudar e que los huns ajudassen als altres. E ­senyaladament lliura a son gendre, linfant don Manuel, Elx e la vall Delda e de Novelda e Asp e Petrer. E lo senyor rey don Alfonso de ­Castella feu axi mateix lo dit infant don Manuel adelantat de tota la sua part, e axi les terres sajudaren e es deffensaren dels moros, los ans ab los altres. Empero ab aquesta convinença lliura lo dit senyor rey En Jacme Darago la sua part del regne de Murcia a son gendre lo rey don Alfonso de Castella e a son gendre linfant don Manuel, que tota hora que ell ho volgues cobrar, que li ho retessen e axi lo ho prometeren e daço faeren bones cartes. Si que per aquesta raho la casa deArago ha recobrats los dits lochs, e foren cobrats, segons que avant vos dire, com lloch e temps sera” in Muntaner, Crónica, chap. 17 (34–5). 92 “[E] lo senyor rey Darago rete lo regne de Murcia al rey don Ferrando, salvant ço qui era de sa conquesta, quel senyor rey En Jacme, son avi, havia donat en dot ab una sua filla a don Manuel, frare del rey don ­Alfonso de Castella; e puis aquella dona mori sens infants, e la terra havia a tornar al senyor rey Darago. E per la gran amistat que el rey En Jacme



Notes to pages 112–15

93

94

95 96 97 98 99 100 101

102 103 104

401

havia ab lo rey don Alfonso, son gendre, e ab linfant d ­ onManuel, qui axi mateix era estat son gendre, lleixaho tenir a don Manuel, e ara lo senyor rey volco cobrar, e gran raho e dret que era. Axi en estes paus recobraho, e aço es, Alicant e Elx e Asp e Petrer e la vall Della e de N ­ ovella e la Mola e Crivillen e Favanella e Gallosa e Oriola e G ­ uardamar” in Muntaner, Crónica, chap. 245 (464–5). “In Montepessulano septimo Calendas Septembris anno Domini ­MCCLXXII [26 August 1272]”: “Item, filios infantis dominae Constantiae quondam filiae nostrae & infantis domini Emanuelis fratris illustris regis Castellae nepotes nostros instituimos heredes nostros in camera & aliis quae prefatae Constantiae dedimus in tempore nuptiarum, & ipsos eis volumus esse contentos de bonis nostris” in Martène and Durand, eds., Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, I.1139–48. In his January 1242 testament, Jaime I had left Constanza sixty thousand morabetines; see Tourtoulon, Jacme Ier le Conquérant, 2.73. “Et el rey don Alfonso tornó a Jahén e mouió con toda su gente para yr al reyno de Murçia. Et alboaquez, que era rey de Murçia, desque sopo cómmo el rey de Granada lo avía desanparado et amos los [reyes] venían con grandes huestes contra él ... vínose para él [a] ponerse en la su merçed ... Et el rey don Alfonso fue a la çibdat de Murçia et este Alboaquez e los moros que estauan en ella entregaron gela, e dexó en el alcáçar al infante don Manuel su hermano. Dende fue a todos los otros lugares que se avían alçado e entregaron gelos, et el rey puso alcaydes en todos los castillos e dio vezindat a muchos christianos que las venieron tomar” (15.42–3). Torres Fontes, Reconquista de Murcia, 109, 121. Torres Fontes, Reconquista de Murcia, 173–4; also see his “Jaime I y Alfonso X. Dos criterios de repoblación,” 2.329–40. DAAX, doc. 312 (334–41). Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, 14 May, doc. 11 (17–21); 19 May, doc. 14 (23–5). DAAX, 20 May, doc. 314 (341–3). Seville, 21 May, in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 16 (26–8). Loperráez, Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma, doc. 66 (3.196–8). del Estal, Documentos inéditos de Alfonso X, 205–10; also cited in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 73 (89–91), but here Manuel’s signature is not included in the pubished text. Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 389. Zurita, Anales, 3.61.660–1, though Zurita claims Esclaramunda was the sister, not the daughter, of Roger de Foix. Peñafiel, 3 October 1299: “Poder otorgado por Don Juan para tratar su matrimonio” in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 19 (241).

402

Notes to pages 116–19

105 See DA, doc. 14. 106 Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, v–vii. The first phase of the reapportionment of the kingdom of Murcia occurred in 1243 with the Treaty of Alcaraz; the second phase took place 1264–66, the third phase 1266–68, the fourth phase 1269–70, and the fifth phase 1272–74. For the final phase between 1286 and 1331, see Torres Fontes, “Última fase.” 107 Guerrero Ventas, La archidiócesis de Toledo, 87. 108 See Mateu y Llopis, Glosario hispánico de numismática: “El maravedí de oro de Alfonso VII de Castilla (1158–1214), mencionado en las ­escrituras mozárabes toledanas desde 1172. En 1265 equivalía a 15 sueldos de ­pepiones” (134). A sueldo was equal to 12 pepiones and 15 sueldos de pepiones equalled 180 pepiones, an amount that corresponds exactly with the text of the CAX, which states: “During the reign of King Fernando, the money in Castile at that time was known as pepiones ... and 180 of those pepiones were worth a maravedí” (1.5). 109 See DA, doc. 15. 110 Cf. part. IV, tít. XXIII; part. IV, ley I, tít. XXI, and part. IV, ley VI, tít. XXI; also see Verlinden, L’esclavage dans l’Europe médiévale and, more recently, Phillips, Jr., Slavery in Medieval and Early Modern Iberia (2014), which ­contains an up-to-date bibliography on the subject. 111 Cf. Phillips, Jr., Slavery in Medieval and Early Modern Iberia, 33–4, 59, 66–8, 70. 112 Armas, 1.132. See also Pretel Marín, “Entre el cuento y la historia,” ­especially subsection 3, “La tierra del infante don Manuel” (16–21). 113 Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 25 (37–9); also published in MHE, doc. 106 (1. 233–5), but here Manuel does not confirm. 114 “Johannes Garsie, Alhama tenens ... Fernandus Petri de Pina, Cartadeniam tenens” in DAAX, doc. 1 (3–4). 115 Pedro III to Infante Manuel, 19 October 1280, in ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 98v. 116 See DA, doc. 16. 117 See Martínez Caviró, “Palacio de Oñate,” 302–3. 118 See Cantigas medievais galego-portuguesas: http://cantigas.fcsh.unl.pt/ autor.asp?cdaut=128&pv=sim. 119 “Garcia Martinez, dean de Cartagena, mio clérigo ... Orrigo Porcel, mio almoxeriff de Murcia ... Guillem de Narbona ... Bernalt de Torreplena ... Andreo Dodana, partidores de Murcia” in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 18 (29–31); see also Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 208. 120 The tahúlla, from Ar. tahwila “field,” is an agrarian measure, usually of irrigated land, equal to 1118 square metres or 2.46 hectares. For an ­extensive explanation of the terms utilized in the partition of Murcia, see Torres Fontes, “Medidas de superficie y de valoración.”

121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131

132

133

Notes to pages 119–21

403

Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 14, 166. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 3, 6–10, 12–18, 90, 131, 156, 158, 247. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 133–4, 185, 195. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 338, 552. Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 401. Soldevila, Pere el Gran, 242, who cites ACA, Reg. 31, fs. 61 i 61v. ACA, Reg. 15, fol. 40v, in Torres Fontes, Reconquista de Murcia, doc. X (214–17). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 420. “Tratado de Badajoz entre Alfonso X y Afonso III de Portugal” in Huarte y Echenique, “Catálogo de documentos,” 802–3; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 420. DAAX, doc. 323 (353–6); see also González Jiménez, “Las relaciones entre Portugal y Castilla.” Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 427, believes the episode took place during the fall of 1267. O’Callaghan, Learned King, 161, calculates 1266–67, while González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 189–90, does not address the chronological confusion, though he does provide several important considerations of the matter. CAX, 19.55–7: “Et otro día el rey don Alfonso mandó llamar al infante don Manuel e a los infantes don Felipe e don Fadrique, sus hermanos, ... E mandó al infante don Deonís su nieto quel dixese aquella razón que le avía dicho a él” (56) ... E don Nuño partióse de la fabla e fuése del palaçio. E el infante don Manuel e todos los otros que y estauan entendieron cómmo el rey tomara enojo por lo que don Nuño dixera. E començó la razón el infante don Manuel e dixo al rey de cómmo el tributo que avía de fazer el rey de Portugal e el su regno al rey de León que era muy pequenno, e que auiendo el infante don Deonís tan grand debdo commo avía, que mucho más que esto auía de fazer el rey por él; e sy lo non fiziese, que le non estaría bien. E sobre esto los otros que estauan y dixieron que el rey auía razón de otorgar al infante lo que le pedía. E el rey otorgó gelo e mandó dar su carta e dióle de sus donas aquéllas quél touo por bien. E el infante partió de Seuilla e fuése para Portugal, et el rey don Alfonso fincó en Seuilla” (57). “Parece sensato el criterio de don Nuño. La munificencia del rey debía contenerse, sin extralimitaciones perjudiciales para su reino. El enajenar alegremente las prerrogativas y derechos de sus reinos, fuera de lesionar intereses, haría incurrir al soberano en una infracción constitucional.... Tuvo el valor de expresar lo que sentía, a trueque de lograr el desamor y el desagrado del monarca.... Contrastarían con la de don Nuño las opiniones de los restantes consejeros, los cuales, aduladores, habían comprendido el mal acogimiento que tendrían los consejos adversos.... Don Felipe no había querido hablar y sólo lo había hecho el infante Don Manuel, espíritu untuoso y contemporizador, que sacaba gran partido

404

134

135 136

137 138

139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149

Notes to pages 121–6 de la debilidad afectuosa que le demostraba su hermano primogénito. Los avisados cortesanos comprendieron en seguida de dónde soplaban los vientos, y no quisieron quedarse atrás y por eso se ­sumaron a las palabras de Don Manuel. Con desvergonzada habilidad su discurso versó acerca de la cuestión del tributo, cuando lo importante era el ­homenaje feudal que declaraba la soberanía de León y, por ende, la del rey de ­Castilla. De un golpe subía la consideración jerárquica de ­Portugal, rota la dependencia histórica que le unía al imperio leonés. Falta imperdonable, que pagaría bien cara el monarca” (Ballesteros, A ­ lfonso X, 430–1). Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 31 (43–9 at 48–9). In 1621, Francisco Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, commented on the economic significance of the fish taken in the Albufera: “es una famosa pesquera de un pescado muy regalado que llaman Mujol, ­proprio de esta ciudad importantísima, así para su regalo como para su renta, pues le vale cada año quatro mil ducados, y algunos años más, y se vende a mucho menos precio de lo que vale; solíase vender antiguamente cada libra de este pescado por tres maravedís, aunque agora se ha subido a diez y seis, si bien vale quando menos más de un real” (55). In Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 79 (94–6). Though the date of the charter is “miercoles .xiiij. dias de setienbre,” ­Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 109 (1936): 459, asserts: “Está equivocada la fecha, pues dice XIIII y el 14 no cayó en miércoles. Creemos que sea un XXVI mal leído.” See DA, doc. 17. “Beatrici regine Castelle illustri. Confirmat donationem eidem factam a F. rege Castellae viro suo, de Carrion, de Logronio, de Belforado, de Penna fideli, de Castro Seriz, de Pancorvo, de Fonte pudia, de Monte ­alegre, de Palentiola, Astudello, Viulla franca, et Roa villas et castella cum pertinentiis eorumdem” in Regesta Honorii Papae III, doc. 4110 (2.92–3). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 41. In MHE, doc. 43 (1.89–93); also see Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 142–6 and 168. Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 407. See DA, doc. 18. DAAX, docs. 342–3 (369–72). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 445. Cortes de los antiguos reinos de León y de Castilla, 1.64. Pretel Marín, Conquista, doc. 14 (275–6). See DA, doc. 19. See Peiró Mateos, El comercio y los comerciantes. DAAX, doc. 348 (375–6).



Notes to pages 126–9

405

150 Jerez, 22 April 1268: “Sepades que el conceio de Murcia me enbiaron mostrar que les tomauan en Elche et en otros lugares muchos del regno de Murcia rotobas a los christianos et a los moros. Onde esto non tengo yo por bien, nin es derecho que ge lo tomen, pues que la tierra es de christianos. Porque uos mando que daqui adelante ninguno non sea osado de tomar arrotouas en Elche nin en otro lugar ninguno del regno de Murcia a los christianos nin a los moros, pues que la tierra es ya ­assessegada et en paz” in AM de Murcia, Privilegios originales, n. 19, published by Torres Fontes, CODOM 1, doc. 35 (52). 151 DAAX, doc. 349 (376–8). 152 MHE, doc. 111 (1.244–6). 153 “Vi uestra carta que me enuiastes en razon de las arrobdas que uos tomauan en la tierra de don Manuel mio hermano. Yo mande a don ­Manuel que uos las non tome, pero si daqui adelante robda uos tomaren, mando uos que la tomedes uos a todos los de la tierra de don Manuel que vinieren a uestra villa et a uestro termino, et non fagades ende al” in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 87 (100). 154 See Poveda Navarro, “Aproximación a la demografía”: “Después de pasar el valle medio del Vinalopó a manos cristiano-castellanas (1243–44), cualquier intento de asentar nuevas gentes en su término comarcal era baldío, las familias castellanas dispuestas a ubicarse en el Medio Vinalopó (o en cualquier nuevo territorio castellano) serían escasas; incluso los dueños del señorío o donadío no solían hacer efectiva la toma de posesión del mismo, pues frecuentemente se marchaban sin arraigar en el lugar. Lo cual tuvo que combatirse legislativamente” (33). 155 DAAX, doc. 352 (379–81). 156 See DA, doc. 20. 157 DAAX, doc. 354 (382–5). 158 Llibre dels feits, chap. 477 (374); Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 451, reaches the same conclusion but without citing any documentation. 159 Llibre dels feits, chap. 475 (373–4) and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 451–4. 160 Llibre dels feits, chap. 478 (375). 161 “E veniem-nos-en a Daimuç, e nós vim lo pendó que eixi allèn on nós deviem passar, e el rei era-hi, e saludam-nos, e dix-nos que volia parlar ab nós, e demana-hi don Manuel, e don Gil Garcés, e don Joan Garcia” in Llibre dels feits, chap. 479 (375–6). 162 For an extensive assessment of Gil Garcés, see Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 199–203. 163 Blecua, ed., Conde Lucanor, 2.439–40. 164 For a historical analysis of the account, see Devoto, Introducción al estudio de Don Juan Manuel, 445–9. 165 Llibre dels feits, chap. 479 (376); Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 453–4.

406

Notes to pages 129–32

166 The Alfonsine document is contained within another issued by ­Fernando IV confirming his grandfather’s proclamation: “Vimos otra carta del mismo en que mandava [Alfonso X] al conçejo de Murçia e a todos los otros conçejos de la conquista, e a todos los conçejos del obispado de Cuenca e de Alcaraz e a las aljamas de los moros de la tierra de don ­Manuel e de don Luys e a todos quantos aquella carta viesen, que ­ninguno fuese osado de les entrar en sus terminos a coger grana ni a caçar en ellos ninguna caça syn su plazer, e fue dada en ­Jahen, diez e syete dias de abril, hera de mill a trezientos e veynte e syete años. ­Pedro Gomez la escrivio” in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de ­Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 146 (156). Though the document is dated 1289, ­Infante Luis had died before 1275, when his widow, Juana Gómez de Manzanedo, sold a number of his landholdings to his nephew Infante Fernando de la Cerda; cf. Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 516. The year ­referred to, then, is most likely 1269. 167 Cf. Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, 29. 168 In a document dated 7 December 1267, he is referred to as “escriuano et notario del sobredicho sennor infante don Manuel” in Torres Fontes, ­Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 35 (31–2). 169 From L. census “head tax”; see Corominas, Diccionario crítico etimológico, s.v. “censo,” 1.764. 170 See DA, doc. 21. See also Hinojosa Montalvo, “La función comercial en Elche durante los siglos bajomedievales,” 8, 14, 17, 28, 56, 99. 171 “Et yuan con el rey Aguarte, su sobrino, fijo heredero del rey de inglaterra, que era venido a resçebir caballería deste rey don Alfonso, e el infante don Pedro, hermano de la reyna donna Violante, que fue después rey de Aragón, et otrosí yuan con él los infantes don Fadrique e don Manuel e don Felipe, sus hermanos, e los infantes don Fernando e don Sancho et don ­Pedro e don Juan e don Jaymes, sus fijos, et el infante don Sancho, ­arzobispo de Toledo, e muchos perlados e ricos omnes e fijosdalgo del regno” in CAX, 18.49; the Crónica errors in dating the event to 1268 and including Infante Fadrique, who would not return to Castile until February 1272. 172 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 489–90. 173 CAX, 18.51–2. 174 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 489–92; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 215–30. 175 CAX, 18.52; Llibre dels feits, chap. 496 (385–6). 176 Llibre dels feits , chap. 497 (386); Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 496. 177 A tafulla (Sp. atahúlla or tahúlla) is an agrarian unit of measure for irrigated land equivalent to 1118 square metres. 178 A jovada (Sp. jubada or yugada) is the amount of land that can be plowed in one day by a team of two mules yoked together. 179 A cafiz (Sp. cahiz) is a dry measure that, in the kingdom of Aragon, was equivalent to 32.64 litres. A cahizada is the amount of land that can be



180 181 182

183 184

185 186 187 188 189

190

191 192

Notes to pages 132–4

407

sown using one cahiz of seed corn and is the equivalent of approximately 38.140 áreas, where one área is equal to 100 square metres. Twelve cafices of seed corn would equal approximately 4.58 hectáreas or 11.3 acres. Llibre dels feits, chap. 498 (386–7). Llibre dels feits, chap. 499 (387–8). “[P]or fazer bien et merced al conceio de Elche, a los christianos que y son pobladores agora et seran daqui adelante pora siempre iamás damosles et otorgamosles que ayan aquellos fueros et aquellas franquezas que nos diemos al conceio de la cibdat de Murcia por nuestsos priuilegios et por nuestras cartas” in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 94 (104). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 510–14; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 223–4. Burgos, 19 May: “Alfonso X otorga a las Huelgas el señorío y la percepción de todos los pechos reales correspondientes a los judíos que moraban en el momento de la concesión en el barrio de Santa Cecilia de Briviesca” in Garrido and Garrido, eds., Documentación del Monasterio de las Huelgas, doc. 560 (32.51–4): “El Infante Don Manuel, ermano del rey e su alferez, confirma.” However, a similar document, “Donación de unos judíos al Monasterio de Santa María la Real de Burgos,” published in MHE, doc. 120, (1.263–65), is not confirmed by Manuel. See DA, doc. 22. See DA, doc. 23. See DA, doc. 24. See DA, doc. 25. See Soler García, “Del Archivo villenense,” 394: “1270 (Era 1308), julio, 6, domingo. Villena: Vn previllegio del infante don Manuel, hijo del Rey don Fernando, de Castilla fecho en Villena domingo seis días de julio de mill trezientos e ocho años Por el qual da y otorga a los vezinos de Villena el fuero y preuilegios de Murcia y de Elche; que lo ayan y se les guarde, con vn sello pendiente en vetas de seda. (Leg. 26, n.° 5),” cited by González Jiménez, DIAX, doc. 3830 (680). Alfonso X originally granted the fuero de Sevilla to Murcia on 18 May 1267; see doc. 327 (358) in DAAX, 358, where only the notice, not the text itself, is given. A synopsis of the text was ­published in 1621 by Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, 60–2. “Privilegio del Rey D. Alfonso X por el que manifiesta fundó en el Lugar de Caleruega un Monasterio de Dueñas”: “D. Sancho, Arzobispo de Toledo, Chanciller del Rey, conf.... D. Felipe, conf. D. Luis, conf.... D. ­Alfonso Fernández, fijo del Rey, conf.... El Infante D. Ferrando, fijo maior del rey, e su Maiordomo maior, conf. El Infante D. Manuel, ­hermano del Rey e su Alferez, conf.” in Loperráez, Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma, doc. 72 (3.207–9). Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 95 (105–7). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 514–15.

408 193 194 195 196

197 198 199 200 201 202

203 204 205 206 207

208 209 210

211 212 213

Notes to pages 134–9 González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 223–4. DAAX, doc. 377 (398–9). Fernández Conde, Monasterio de San Pelayo de Oviedo, doc. 129 (235–7). “Unde videntes ... rex Karolus et rex Navarie et dictus Oddoardus non posse ibi moram facere propter victualia et propter multitudinem ­Saracenorum et propter dompnum Fredericun de Castella ... qui cum multa quantitate militum christianorum ad soldos regis Tunicis ibi erant, pactum fecerunt cum rege Tunicia promitente eis dare censum illum quem solitus erat dare quondam domno Frederico imperatori; et ita ­recesserunt omnes relicta bene ibi medietate christianorum in campis sepulta” (Annales Placentini Gibellini, 18.547). See Torres Fontes, “La repoblación murciana en el siglo XIII,” 19–20. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 517–25. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 523–5. Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 44 (58–61). See DA, doc. 26. “Et sobre esto mando al merino que fuere en el regno que lo faga conplir sy no al cuerpo et quanto ouiesse me tornaria por ello,” in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 104 (113–14). Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 106 (115–16). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 523. See Lomax, “Padre,” 167; Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, 29. Cf. González Arce, “La política fiscal de Alfonso X.” See Meouak and Guichard in Encyclopaedia of Islam, s.v. “s∙āh∙ib al-madīna”: “According to the Valencian Ibn al-Abbār [q.v.], there existed until the 7th/13th century two distinct magistratures, se. the s∙āh∙ib al-madīna and the s. al-shurt∙a. In the 8th/14th century, Ibn Saʿīd [q.v.] (in the great, later compilation of Andalusian culture by al-MaK∙K∙arī, the Nafh∙ al-t∙īb ), and in the following one, Ibn K haldūn [q.v.], in his MuK∙addima , also mention ¯ the title of s∙. al-madīna, but make it the designation of the chief of the ­police or shurt∙a in Muslim Spain.” See DA, doc. 27. See also Hinojosa Montalvo, “Privilegios reales a mudéjares y judíos,” 281–2. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 544. “Confirman Don Felipp ... Don Loys ... Alffonsso Garçia, adelantado mayor de tierra de Murçia et del Andaluzia” in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 114 (123–31). DAAX, doc. 385 (404–6). Benvenuto de Sancto Giorgio, Historia Montisferrati, 23.392. Murcia, 21 October, in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 47 (64). González Jiménez, DIAX, doc. 2369 (405), mistakenly



214 215 216 217 218 219

220

221 222

223 224

225 226

227 228

Notes to pages 139–42

409

references the charter published by Torres Fontes as “n. CCI” and cites the same document again with the date 18 December 1271 in doc. 2380 (407). MHE, doc. 124 (1.268–71). Murcia, 19 November, in DAAX, doc. 389 (409–10). DAAX, doc. 391 (411–12). See DA, doc. 28. Murcia, 22 February, in Arch. Municipal de Casas de Ves, published by Pretel Marín, Conquista, doc. 21 (279–80). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 547, references the privilege (doc. 824, p. 1100) but does not publish it, stating that “[d]e la llegada de Don Fadrique poseemos un testimonio irrefutable, y es que aparece confirmando en el privilegio rodado a Palencia del día 26 de febrero. Podemos suponer que hacía poco que había vuelto.” The document has since been published by Del Valle Curieses, “Archivo Municipal de Palencia” (1987), 120. Murcia, 14 March: “Et ortogamos les el Alcaria de Gerues que es en termino de Seuilla, ... Et esta alquería les damos en camio de Solucar Albayda, et de Brenes que les tomamos, et que diemos al Infante don Ffredriq nuestro hermano” in DAAX, doc. 392 (413–14): “El infante don Manuel, ermano del rey e su alférez, conf.” Ortiz de Zúñiga, Anales de Sevilla, 1.279. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, briefly mentions the matter, referring to the appellant as “Johan Ladrón” though the text never states his given name. A “Ferrand Ladrón” is cited on p. 154 but is probably not the same person, since all landholdings of the appellant refer exclusively to him as “Ladrón.” Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 199–203. “Beside the long cavalry-lance – the most important weapon to chivalry in battle – we find the shortened lance for dismounted cavalry and for infantry, the javelin or the dart and the so-called ascona montera, the short lance or javelin originally for hunting but used in war too” in Bruhn de Hoffmeyer, Arms and Armour in Spain, 2.205. See Beroiz Lazcano, Gómez Aguirre, and Serrano Larráyoz, “Léxico sobre armamento y utillaje militar medieval,” 205 and 210 s.v. “alvesa.” The pseudo-Arabic silver bezant was a monetary unit of account worth three Valencian sueldos or sous according to a document issued in V ­ alencia on 18 April 1266 in which Jaime I acknowledges certain debts i­ ncurred in the conquest of Murcia: “ad racionem trium solidorum r­ egalium pro ­unoquoque bisancio” in Burns, Diplomatarium of the C ­ rusader Kingdom, doc. 267 (219). “Cushion, pillow, mattress from the Ar. almat∙ráh∙” according to the DRAE, s.v. “almadraque.” DRAE, s.v. “tragacete”: “Arma antigua arrojadiza a manera de dardo o de flecha (del berb. *tagzalt, dim. de agzal, chuzo [típico de los norteafricanos].”

410

Notes to pages 142–5

229 See DA, doc. 29. 230 From Ar. h’abba, a unit of measure applied to a volume of water allocated for a specific amount of time to a particular portion of land, which does not correspond to a precise surface area but to the agricultural production the land was expected to yield for purposes of taxation; one alfaba was roughly equal to two tahúllas. See an extensive explanation of the term in Torres Fontes, “Medidas de superficie y de valoración.” 231 Though the exact meaning of the term rahal is still debated, Glick, Paisajes de la conquista, states that “[e]n el repartimiento de Murcia los rahales se sitúan en el borde de la huerta, son extensos y no irrigados, pero su uso no es pastoral, ya que se dedican al cultivo de cereales de secano” (48); elsewhere in Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 233, Alfonso’s grant is once again itemized, though here the text records that his alfabas are to be found in the “arahales” or outskirts of the Sangonera district of the city. 232 “Toma mas el dicho Pero Ximenes [de Calasanç], que le dio don Manuel, vna cauallería” in Repartimiento de Lorca, 45–6. 233 See Esquerdo, Nobiliario valenciano, 82; and García de la Borbolla, “Presencia de navarros y vascos,” 576. Gil Garcés/García de Azagra I (c. 1180–1238) and Gil García de Azagra II (d. 1272) are father and son; for a detailed ­account of both, see Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 199–203. 234 Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 200. 235 CAX, 20.15–17; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 518–19. 236 Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 49 (66–9); doc. 50 (69–72). 237 CODOM 1, doc. 52 (73–6); also in MHE, doc. 126 (1.273–6), but here Manuel does not appear. 238 MHE, doc. 128 (1.285): “E tomen tierra quanta quisieren pora adriellos, e pora texas, e pora tapiar, e que pesquen francamente en aguas dulzes e en la mar, salvas nuestras alboreas, e las que hemos dado al Infante Don Manuel nuestro hermano.” The limits of the Albufera de Murcia and Cabo de Palos were originally established in a royal privilege given in Murcia on 4 September 1254, published in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 20 (30–3); the rights were then assigned to Manuel in Jaén on 18 May 1267, published in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 31 (43–9). 239 MHE, doc. 128 (1.186): “Otorgamosles e mandamosles que si nostra carta viniere a Murcia contra los fueros e las franquezas e los privilegios que los havemos dados, que nos los fagan saber e ende tanto que den fiador en poder de nuestro Adelantado, o daquel que estubiere y en su logar, que cumpla quanto nos mandaremos.” 240 MHE, doc. 124 (1.268–71).



Notes to pages 145–8

411

241 Unpublished document in the AM de Murcia, repart. fol. 94, reported by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, doc. 838 (1100). 242 “Et dize don Iohan que él oyo dezir al infante don Iohan que avn en aquel tienpo que matauan las gruas commo desuso es dicho, que vio el a vn falcon sacre del infante don Manuel en Murçia, do estauan entonçe el rey don Alfonso et don Manuel, que mataua la grua quando andaua muy alta de rodeo et vinia atrauesadiza, et avn que se veyan en muy grand coyta el et don Alfonso, fijo del infante don Manuel, quando avian acorrer aquel falcon por razon de las grandes açequias que ay en la huerta de Murçia. Et dize que él oyo decir que don Manuel era el mayor caçador et que mas aues tenya, et que juraua el infante don Iohan que dexara vna vegada al rey don Alfonso et a don Manuel con él en Seuilla et que tenia y don Manuel consigo muchos falcones, et el infante don Iohan viniase para Castiella, et quando llego a Medelin, que fallo y çient et sesenta falcones de don Manuel que estauan y de morada caçando, por que es buena tierra de caça, et estos eran de mas de los que el tenia en Seuilla et tenían por maravilla si en tres o en quatro annos podían fazer vn ­maestro” (Libro de la caza, 1.559). 243 Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 54 (77–80). 244 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 560. 5. Revolt of the Nobles and Last Pretence of Empire: 1272–75 1 “E seyendo en Alcaraz, llegaron y cartas del infante don Ferrando e del infante don Manuel, que eran en Seuilla, en que enbiauan dezir que eran pasados grant conpanna de moros de allén mar por que enbiara el rey de Granada e que auían corrido la tierra e muertos e catiu[ad]os muchos omnes e que conbatieron el castillo de Bejer ... Et el rey por esto enbió mandar a todos los de la frontera que fiziesen guerra al rey de Granada” (CAX, 22.70). 2 Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 126 (137–9). 3 Alcaraz, 25 de junio 1272: “Privilegio rodado de Alfonso X concediendo franqueza a los vecinos de Cartagena,” in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, doc. 127, 140–2. 4 Cuenca, 15 July, in DAAX, doc. 397 (418–20). 5 “Por fazer bien y merced al Concejo de Cáceres y por el servicio que ­fizieron a mí y al Infante Don Fernando mio fijo, quando entraron con él a tierra de Granada” in Ulloa y Golfín, Fueros y privilegios de Cáceres, 99; cited by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 594. 6 See Ibn Abi Zar, Rawd al-Qirtas, ed. Huici Miranda, 2.317, and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 565.

412

Notes to pages 149–50

7 CAX, 52.149. 8 In García Soriano, Vocabulario del dialecto murciano, 154, cited in Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 53 (48), which does not print the text. 9 Registres de Grégoire X (1272–76), doc. 192 (65); Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 674–76. 10 O’Callaghan, Cortes of Castile-León, remarks that “[t]he cortes of Burgos 1272 was, without question, the most important of Alfonso X’s reign” (118 et passim); even the normally hostile CAX concedes that on this ­occasion “mostró el Rey tan bien su razon, que todos los que estaban y entendieron que él tenía razon e derecho, e que don Felipe e aquellos ricos omes facian aquel alborozo muy sin razon” (25.22). On the other hand, see Hernández, “La reina Violante de Aragón,” 89–91, for evidence ­supporting the legitimacy of the nobles’ complaints against their sovereign. 11 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 591; privilege in Documentos del Archivo general de la Villa de Madrid, 1.113–17. 12 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 587; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 252. 13 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 584–6. Queen Violante’s role in negotiating a settlement with the rebels represented perhaps her finest hour and is reflected in the image of her sculpted on the right shield arch console of the east wing of the Burgos Cathedral cloister, no doubt by order of her grateful husband. Here she is depicted as a confident, mature royal fully capable of standing in for the king during this crisis. The effigy of Queen Violante was ­photographed but not recognized by Abegg, Königs- und ­Bischofsmonumente, figs. 176–7, and was first identified as Violante by ­Frederick B. Deknatel, “Thirteenth Century Gothic Sculpture,” 322, influencing Ballesteros, who published the cloister effigy in Historia de España (1943), 3.1.70. 14 Diccionario de antigüedades del reino de Navarra, 3.42–3, based on texts in the Archivo de Navarra, caj. 3, docs. 58–64, the latter dated 22 January 1273; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 599, cites doc. 62 in the Archivo de Navarra without publishing the text. 15 The CAX, 27.93, says “le pidiesen plazo de treinta dias e de nueve dias e de tres dias a que pudiesen salir de los reinos”; a nine-day grace period was customary, as in the Poema de mio Cid, vv. 306–7, and the legend of Bernardo del Carpio, PCG, chap. 652 (372). 16 CAX, 27.93, n. 149; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 590; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 254. 17 “E dende enbió al arçobispo e a los obispos de Palençia e de Segouia que fuesen al infante don Ferrando e al infante don Manuel e todos en vno que salliesen al camino al infante et a los ricos omnes e fablasen con ellos si los pudiesen tornar. Et estos caualleros fueron con ellos fasta en



Notes to pages 150–6

18 19 20

21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28

29 30 31

32

33

34 35 36

37

413

cabo del regno, guiándolos e defendiéndoles que a los de la tierra non les ­fiziesen mal” (CAX, 27.93–4). González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 254. DAAX, doc. 399 (425–6). The CAX calls it an “ayuntamiento” of “ricos omes e infanzones e caballeros fijosdalgo, e otros caballeros fijosdalgo de las cibdades e villas quel Rey mandó llamar para esto” (47.133); see also O’Callaghan, Cortes of Castile-León, 24–5, 52, and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 637–46. CAX, 48.136–7; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 631–43. CAX, 48.137. Cortes de los antiguos reinos de León y de Castilla, doc. 15 (1.85–6). CAX, 50.140–2; see also O’Callaghan, Cortes of Castile-León, 25, n. 27, for additional bibliography and documentation; and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 646–7, 676–7. MHE, doc. 132 (1.292–5). CAX, 52.145. See Domínguez Sánchez, Documentos de Gregorio X, docs. 120–5 (251–5). Cf. the document signed and dated by Pelay Pérez de Correa and ­Alfonso X, Barcelona, 5 January 1275, published in Aguado de Córdova et al., ­Bullarium equistris ordinis S. Iacobi, 210; cited by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 725, n. 104. CAX, 52.145. Menéndez Pidal, Documentos lingüísticos, doc. 349 (463–4). “[E]ra en Auila, que venía y por fablar con los conçejos de tierra de León e de las Estremaduras que fize allí ayuntar, e oue enfermedat de romadizo e de calentura poca” (CAX, 52.144). For a full account of the king’s illness as detailed over the years in one of his most intimate revelations, see Kinkade, “Alfonso X, Cantiga 235,.” See also the observations and conclusions drawn in this same context by Martínez, Alfonso X, 233–97. CAX, 53.152–3. For a detailed and balanced account of Violante’s role in negotiating a truce with the nobles, see Hernández, “La reina Violante de Aragón,” 98–100 et passim. MHE, doc. 132 (1.292–5). Documentación de la Catedral de Segovia, (1) doc. 188 (298–300); (2) doc. 189 (300–304); (3) doc. 190 (304–6); (4) doc. 191 (307–10). (1) “Carta del infante don Manuel, hijo de Fernando III, al concejo de Peñafiel sobre ciertas quejas de los que moran en el solar del alcázar de la villa” in AHN, Clero-Secular Regular, car. 3435, n. 1, fol. 6r–v; (2) ­Documentación Catedral de Segovia, doc. 192 (310–13). Documentación Catedral de Segovia, doc. 193 (313–16).

414

Notes to pages 156–9

38 DAAX, doc. 402 (427–8): “El infante don Manuel, mayordomo del rey, la mandó fazer por mandado del rey.” 39 Documentación Catedral de Segovia, (1) doc. 194 (316–19); (2) doc. 195 (319–21); (3) DAAX, doc. 404 (429–30): “El infante don Manuel, ermano del rey e su alférez, conf. El infante don Ferrando, fijo mayor del rey e su mayordomo, conf.” 40 See DA, doc. 30. 41 CAX, 54.159. 42 CAX, 53.152; Guadalajara, 3 June, in MHE, doc. 132 (293); 3 July, in DAAX, doc. 404 (429). 43 CAX, 56.163–4; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 664. 44 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 670; also see Miret i Sans, Itinerari de Jaume I, 485. 45 CAX, 57.165. 46 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 677–8, reaches a similar conclusion: “El rey cayó enfermo in Requena de un mal de terciana. Su salud no era buena desde el accidente de Burgos. Su dolencia in Fitero y aquel mismo año el ­romadizo en Ávila demostraban que el cuerpo se resentía de los trabajos del espíritu y no era pequeña ocasión de enfermedad las preocupaciones del gobierno y los continuos disgustos producidos por los rebeldes.” 47 “[E]n Requena este Rey mal enfermou, / u cuidavan que morresse, daquel mal ben o sãou; / fez por el este miragre” in Cantigas de Santa ­Maria, ed. Mettmann, 2.313. 48 The CAX, chs. 57–8, states that from October to December Alfonso travelled from Burgos to Seville and back again to negotiate with the rebels in Seville, a scenario with which Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 680–2, concurs. González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 269–70, however, provides convincing ­circumstantial evidence to suggest that the king remained in Burgos until April 1274. 49 In Campi, Dell’historia ecclesiastica di Piacenza, 2.438–9. 50 DAAX, doc. 405 (430–2). 51 O’Callaghan, Cortes of Castile-León: “The business of the cortes was threefold: to establish Fernando de la Cerda as regent during his father’s ­absence; to arrange for a retinue of knights who would accompany the king on his journey; and to obtain the necessary financial aid” (101); see also Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 683–7, and González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 273–5. 52 Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 492. 53 Murcia, 24 January 1274: “et ceperant eciam in portu infantis domni Emanuelis duos judeos in alio ligno et ceperant eciam quoddam lignum in quo veniebant Alvarus Martinii, nuncius illustris regis Castelle et duo nuncii regis Tirimicii et alii sarraceni” in Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 492. 54 The Repartimiento de Murcia, refers to him at the beginning of the document, indicating his elevated social standing, stating: “Aluar Martinez



Notes to pages 159–61

55 56

57

58 59

60

415

tiene en Cudiaçibit lxxx taffullas, que son xxii alffabas” (2). He is referenced later in the fifth partition in the same paragraph as “Pero Johan, omne de don Manuel”: “A Aluar Martinez de Cartagena xxii alffabas, porque tenia carta del Rey en que otorgaua que le fincasse, el morado en el çinto de Cartagena” (222). “[Q]ue sunt vel fuerint in portu infantis dompni Emanuelis dum ibi ­fuerint et personas ac merces que in eis sint,” in Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 493. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 699, mentions this episode without identifying the source; Palacios Martín, “Los símbolos de la soberanía,” provides the missing data found in ACA, Reg. 19, fol. 125, and Reg. 20, fols. 222v–223, adding that “[e]n 1274 Jaime el Conquistador se ve en la necesidad de obligar una espléndida corona, acaso la que Pedro II recibió de Inocencio III y que dejó depositada junto con las demás insignias en el monasterio de Sigena, al mercader Bandino Amanati, de Pistoya, por un préstamo de 30.000 sueldos torneses. La corona, junto con las demás joyas empeñadas, fueron entregadas en depósito al comendador Raimundo de Baró, quien en febrero del año siguiente las devuelve al rey” (275). See also Engels, “El Rey Jaime I de Aragón.” While Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 693–7, and González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 375–8, assert that this was yet another session of cortes, O’Callaghan, Cortes of Castile-León, 120, argues that the meeting was primarily for the purpose of formulating the Ordenanza de Zamora, involving legal ­procedures that did not necessarily require the participation of all of the estates but only those individuals specifically qualified to speak to the matter in a juridical sense; see also Iglesia Ferreirós, “Las Cortes de ­Zamora de 1274.” DAAX, doc. 412 (436–8). Like his ill-fated uncle and namesake, Louis (1243–59), firstborn of King Louis IX, who had been betrothed to Alfonso’s daughter and heir ­Berenguela, Louis (1265–76), the son and heir of Philippe III, died in childhood; see Martin, Histoire de France, 4.363. Philippe had envisioned the permanent acquisition of Navarre when young Louis succeeded to the throne, but his plans were thwarted by Gregory X, who effectively blocked this arrangement in the Treaty of Orleans (May 1275) by authorizing the betrothal of Jeanne of Navarre to Philippe’s second son, who would be known as Philippe IV the Fair; see Langlois, Règne de Philippe III, 98. The Aragonese faction was captained at this juncture by Jaime I’s son, ­Pedro, who would succeed him as Pedro III in 1276. By that time, however, Pedro had renounced his Navarrese pretensions and reached a reconciliation with his former brother-in-law Philippe III, whose first marriage in 1262 to Pedro’s sister, Isabel, had ended with her tragic death in January 1271; see Langlois, Règne de Philippe III, 51–2, 105.

416 61 62 63 64 65

66

67 68

69

70

71 72 73 74 75 76 77

Notes to pages 161–4 See O’Callaghan, History, 223, 361; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 694–700. Documentos de Gregorio X, docs. 110, 111 (240–3). See Linehan, Spanish Church, 188–221; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 709–14. García Sáinz de Baranda, Apuntes históricos sobre la ciudad de Medina de Pomar, Appendix 1 (381–4). A communication from Infante Fernando addressed to the town council of Mendavia on 8 November does not mention Infante Manuel, and it would appear that the young prince was solely in charge of the military expedition; see Archivo general de Navarra, doc. 1 (5). Peñafiel, 12 April 1275: “El infante don Fernando comunica a los concejos del obispado de Ávila las respuestas dadas a los prelados en las vistas de Peñafiel,” doc. 35 (179); and Cuéllar, 15 April 1275: “El infante don Fernando comunica a los concejos del obispado de Palencia la respuesta dada a las peticiones de los prelados en las vistas de Peñafiel” in Pardo Rodríguez, La cancillería de don Fernando de la Cerda, doc. 36 (182). CAX, 59.170–1. The entire trip from Valencia to Montpellier is described in detail in the Crónica de Ramon Muntaner, chaps. 22–3 (44-9), which while rich in ­details of persons and places is often unreliable and notably deficient in its chronology. Inclán, “Sepulcro del Infante don Felipe,” 159–61, states that the tomb contains some forty-three escutcheons of the Order of the Temple, ­together with effigies of three knights Templar officiating at the ceremony. Guy was confirmed by Gregory X on 6 August 1272 and died in Tarascon sometime after the death of the pope in January 1276; see Chevalier, N ­ otice chronologico-historique sur les Évêques de Valence, 9. Documentos de Gregorio X, doc. 151 (298–300). See DA, doc. 31. Documentos de Gregorio X, docs. 154, 155, 157 (302–4; 305–6). See DA, doc. 32. See the itinerary established by González Jiménez and Carmona Ruiz, DIAX, 75–8. Muntaner, Crónica: “los jocs e els alegres qui foren feyts a Muntpessler, passaren a tots altres feyts. E aqui estegren quinze jorns” (23.48). Physicians trained at Montpellier were prominently featured in ­Alfonso’s court, and one long-time retainer, Maestre Nicolás, was, according to the CAX, 77.240, with the king in his last hours some nine years later. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 1049, reports that “[s]obre maestre Nicolás existen unas trovas burlescas que ponen en duda su ciencia de curar. Era hombre culto, aficionado a la poesía y a la música, condiciones recomendables para ser médico del Rey Sabio. Había estudiado en Monpellier.” The poems cited here in Cantigas d’Escarnho e de mal dizir are by Afonso Eanes



Notes to pages 164–6

78

79 80 81

82 83

84

85 86 87

417

do Cotom (no. 42, pp. 75–6) and Pedro d’Ambroa (no. 332, pp. 494–5); see also Torres Fontes, “Un médico alfonsí: Maestre Nicolás,” 9–16. The pope’s letter to Alfonso, in Documentos de Gregorio X, doc. 164 (313), is undated, but in it he states that he plans to leave Tarascona after the Octave of Easter, which fell on 21 April 1274. “[Q]uando da terra sayu e que foi veer / o Papa que enton era, foi tan mal adoecer / que o teveron por morto” (st. 8bcd). See DA, doc. 33. See Potthast, Regesta, doc. 21037 (1697). The first letter despatched by ­Alfonso from Beaucaire was a letter to the town council of Pavia on 21 May published in Annales Placentini Gibellini, 18.561. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 730, says the pope was there on 10 May but provides no documentation. Documentación medieval de la casa de Velada, 1.24; cited in DIAX, doc. 2735 (470). Potthast, Regesta, doc. 21069 (1699), cites the pope’s last communication from Beaucaire on 4 September, and records he was in Orange four days later; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 770, says 13 September. CAX, 66.188: “De las cosas que el rey don Alfonso pasó en cuanto fué al Imperio, la estoria a escusado de las contar por cuanto no se falló en quál manera pasaron.” Ayala Martínez, “Alfonso X: Beaucaire,” 5–31, reviews in detail the evidence for the five principal reasons Alfonso travelled to see the pope as enumerated by Zurita, Anales, 3.93, adding to the list the king’s support for Genova and the Lombard League and, perhaps most importantly, the propagandistic value of the trip, which Ayala perceptively views as an attempt to rally to his cause the various elements of Ghibelline persuasion in Aragon, Catalonia, the Midi, and northern Italy. In this case, Alfonso would have made every effort to conceal the nature and extent of his illness, which may well account for the lack of official records alluding to his condition. González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 297, n. 6. See Ibn Abi Zar, Rawd al-Qirtas, ed. Huici Miranda, 2:318–19; see also Ibn Khaldūn, Histoire des Berbères, 4:76. Contemporary accounts give conflicting dates for this event: the CAX, 64.183–5, “De commo el infante don Fernando se venia a la frontera a la guerra de los moros, e commo murió in Villa Real, de dolencia,” recalls that “estando el infante Don Fernando in aquella villa, adolescio de grand dolencia, e ... fino en el mes de agosto.” The Anales toledanos III, 23:410–23, reports that Fernando died on St. James’s Day, 25 July: “Anno Domini M.CC.LXXV.= VIII. Kalendas Agusti obiit Dominus Fernandus, filius Regis Castellae, illustris domini Alfonsi filius” (419); the Chronicon de Cardeña, 23:375, states, “Era de MCCCXII [1274!] años murió el Infant D. Ferrando.” Fernando’s grandfather, Jaime I, reports

418

88

89

90 91 92 93 94

Notes to pages 166–8 in Crònica 552.186 that “nós estant en Girona, haguem ardit que en ­Ferrando, fill ­primogènit del rei de Castella e nét nostre, era mort”; Miret i Sans, I­ tinerari, 522, ­affirms that Jaime I was in Gerona between 30 July and 18/19 ­August 1275, which must have been about the same time Alfonso received the news. Jofré de Loaysa, Crónica, states: “dompnus Fernandus ... ­decubuit ... apud Villam Regalem ..., quod nondum XXVI peregisset ­annum, ... obiit era MaCCCaXIIIa, in vigilia sancti Jacobi apostoli” (18), noting that ­Fernando (1255–75) was twenty-six when he died! Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 765, without citing either the Crònica de Jaume I or Loaysa, rejects both the July and August dates, basing his arguments exclusively on the CAX, which states that Fernando had already learned of the deaths of Nuño and Archbishop Sancho, who had died in battle on 7 September and 21 October respectively, arguing that the sequence of events and Fernando’s knowledge of them as reported by the CAX oblige us to place his death towards the end of November 1275. In final analysis, the evidence provided by the grandfather, Jaime I, the Anales toledanos III, and Loaysa, who must have been about Fernando’s age and was also the son of Jofré Sr., ayo or tutor to both Queen Violante and ­Fernando, is compelling. Loaysa may be excused for confusing ­Fernando’s chronological age but hardly his date of death, which coincided with the feast day of Spain’s patron saint, Santiago, a coincidence that must have seemed portentous to many Spaniards. “E pois a Monpisler vêo e tan mal adoeceu / que quantos fisicos eran, cada hũu ben creeu / que sen duvida mort’era; mas ben o per guareceu / a Virgen Santa Maria, como Sennor mui leal” (st. 9). This information is found in three sources: Desclot, Llibre del rei en Pere: “en aquell viatge, mentre se’n tornava a Barcelona, morí un seu n ­ ebot, fill d’En Manuel son frare, e una sua filla, molt bella donzella, qui havia nom dona Lionor” (66.454); Anales toledanos III: “in regresu aput M ­ ontempesulanun decesit Alfonsus Emanuelis, nepos ejus, & filius Domini Emanuelis f­ ratris Regis, & Donna Elianor filia Regis mortua est in via in regresu” (419); Juan Manuel, Chronicon: “Et obiit infans dominus Alfonsus filius infantis domini Emmanuelis in Montepessulano” in Baist, “Don Juan Manuel, La Crónica complida,” 551–2; we refer to the work here and throughout as Chronicon, the name now preferred for this short history. CAX, 62.178–80; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 299–301. Potthast, Regesta, doc. 21073 (1699). See Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 777–8. See DA, doc. 34. “Tu uero, sicut misse nobis tue littere continebat, dilecto filio nobili viro Emanuele, germano ipsius, dicto priore necnon et quibusdam aliis, quorum nomina in eisdem tuis litteris exprimuntur, presentibus, eundem



Notes to pages 168–71

95 96 97

98

99 100 101 102 103

104 105 106

107 108 109 110 111

419

regem, iuxta mandati nostri seriem, monere ac inducere curauisti. Dictus autem rex inter cetera tibi respondit quod infra quindenam instantis fest Beati Michaelis, tibi super premissis finaliter responderet” in Documentos de Gregorio X, doc. 213 (366–8). Documentos de Gregorio X, doc. 214 (368–9). Potthast, Regesta, doc. 21071 (1699). “Et obiit dominus Alfonsus filius infantis domini Emmanuelis in Montepessulano. Et contraxit infans dominus Emmanuel cum comitissa in eodem mense” in Chronicon, 551–2. Infante Manuel’s marriage to Beatrice Contesson and his relationship with the House of Savoy is extensively analysed in Kinkade, “Beatrice ‘Contesson’ of Savoy,”and will be more fully developed in the next chapter. Molinier, “Trahison du vicomte de Narbonne,” provides an intriguing account, based on documentary evidence (see n. 1, p. 409) of Alfonso’s secret alliance with Viscount Aymeri, who renounced his allegiance to Philippe III, swearing fealty to the king of Castile. His narrative recounts that the marriage between Infante Pedro and Marguerite was arranged by the bishop of Béziers, Pons de Saint-Just, and that Aymeri, together with his two brothers Amauri and Guillaume, escorted Alfonso from Narbonne to Gerona where they left him, returning several days later to accompany him from Villafranca de Penedès to Zaragoza (411). See Kinkade and Keller, “An Orphaned Miniature of Cantiga 235,” 34–41. CAX, 63.180–3; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 301–3. CAX, 66.188. DIAX, 470. “E feze-ll’ in poucos dias que podesse cavalgar / e que tornass’ a ssa terra por in ela ben sãar; / a passou per Catalonna, in que ouve de fillar jornadas grandes no dia, como quen and’a jornal” (st. 10). Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 524–6; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 775. Llibre dels feits, chap. 549 (413); Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 771. Desclot, Llibre del rei en Pere: “en aquell viatge, mentre se’n tornava a Barcelona, morí ... una sua filla, molt bella donzella, qui havia nom dona Lionor” (66.454); Anales toledanos III: “Donna Elianor filia Regis mortua est in via in regresu” (419); see also Gutiérrez Baños, “El sepulcro de la infante doña Leonor.” Muntaner, Crónica, 24.50: “Mas no torna per aquelles parts que era entrat, ans se torna per Lleyda e per Arago”; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 775. CAX, 67.189; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 775. DAAX, doc. 422 (447). DIAX, docs. 2737–42 (470–2), dated Alcalá de San Juste, 17 December 1275–1 January 1276. CAX, 65.187.

420

Notes to pages 173–5 6. The House of Savoy: 1275

1 “Et obiit dominus Alfonsus filius infantis domini Emmanuelis in ­Montepessulano. Et contraxit infans dominus Emmanuel cum comitissa in eodem mense” in Baist, “Don Juan Manuel, La Crónica complida,” 551–2. 2 Alfonso X: “Acuciado por el afán de tener descendencia masculina, el infante Don Manuel casó con la condesa de Saboya, sin guardar el luto de su hijo y en el mismo mes de su fallecimiento” (772). 3 “El padre,” 174: “No hay datos sobre la boda, ni sobre su motivo.” 4 Ayala Martínez, “Alfonso X: Beaucaire,” 24. 5 Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 11–14. 6 Zurita, Anales, 3.60.602 and 3.69.655. 7 Annales Placentini Gibellini, 18.549, 553–4; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5519. The CAX refers to the marriage but mistakenly affirms that W ­ illiam married Leonor: “donna Leonor que casó en Murçia con el marqués [de Monferrad]” (3.11); the same Crónica, however, rectifies this error in 18.50, and 75.212: “el marqués de Monferrad que era casado con donna Beatriz.” Lomax, “Padre,” 174, mistakenly says that Beatrice was married to ­William’s father, Boniface. 8 William, also known as “Spadalunga,” is mentioned by Dante in ­Purgatorio, 7.133–6: “Quel che più basso tra costor s’atterra, / Guardando in suso, è Guiglielmo Marchese, / Per cui e Alessandria e la sua Guerra / Fa pianger Montferrato e Canavese,” referring to his imprisonment in Alessandria in Piedmont where he was betrayed, captured, and confined in an iron cage until his death in 1292. See also Bozzola, Un capitano di guerra e signore subalpino. 9 CAX: “el infante don Juan casó con la fija del marqués de Montferrat, que era casado con la infanta donna Beatriz su fija” (75.212); Annales ­Placentini Gibellini, 18.553; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5519. 10 Muntaner, Crónica, chap. 263 (500-1). 11 Zurita, Anales, 2.68.365. 12 See Matthew Paris, Chronica majora, 3.362; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 49–51. 13 Zurita, Anales, 3.19.496. 14 “Quattro figlie ebbe, e ciascuna reina, / Ramondo Beringhieri, e ciò li / fece Romeo” (Paradiso, 6.133–5). 15 Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 65. 16 See Calendar of Patent Rolls Henry III, 259, 260, 266; Rymer, Foedera, 1.399; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 109. 17 He was confirmed in this office in September 1243 by the newly elected Pope Innocent IV. See Fontana, Documenti sulle Relazioni tra la Casa di Savoia e la Santa Sede, docs. xxix–xxxi; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 110, 129; ­Wilshire, Boniface of Savoy, 20–40.



Notes to pages 175–7

421

18 Galland, “Un Savoyard sur le siège de Lyon,” 49–51.; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 111, 122. 19 Denholm-Young, Richard of Cornwall, 48–50; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 114–17. 20 Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 56–8; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 232, mistakenly refers to Thomas as “el tío de Blanca de Castilla, la madre de San Luis.” 21 Calendar of Close Rolls Henry III, 13.366; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 98. 22 The marriage contract is published in Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, doc. 3206 (2.541); see also Mugnier, “Communication sur deux chartes relatives au deuxième mariage d’Amédée IV.” 23 “[M]oult sage ... de toutes bonnes meurs playne, & assuyuye de manieres & condicions qui estre doyuent en vne bonne pucelle” in Servion, Gestez, 1.246. 24 Barthélemy, Inventaire de la maison de Beaux, docs. 314, 315; cited in Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 126, n. 85. 25 Servion, Gestez: “son frere Pierre de Sauoye ... espousa para & au nom de son frere la belle Cecille” (1.246). 26 Servion, Gestez: “Et ainsy desmoura la contesse Cicille, & dedans ­lannee elleust vng filz nomme Bonyface, & apres eust vne fillie appellee ­Contensse” (1.246). 27 Cox, Eagles of Savoy, insists that “[t]he traditional date given for his ­[Boniface’s] birth, 1245, has no documentary foundation, and the ­documents that do mention him show that as late as 1262 he had still not reached his majority” (278 and n. 36). 28 Servion, Gestez: “fust grand de corpz, furnys de puissans membres, bien forme, haut & droys, & a merueilliez bel & playsant homme, & dung hautain & grant corage, fier & soubtil, sages, caut & malicieux; & en son tempz ne troua qui le passast de force, dont de pluseurs fust appelle le segond Rolant” (1.275). 29 Registres d’Innocent IV, 2.lix; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 144. 30 Miret i Sans, citing Tourtoulon, Jacme Ier le Conquérant, says, “No trobem que D. Jaume pogués efectuar la dita expedició sinó en la primera quinzena de novembre, i en cas afirmatiu degué ésser molt ràpida o curta ... totes les dades avui conegudes no permeten sospitar que D. Jaume anés a Provença abans de celebrar-se l’esmentat casament” (Itinerari, 175–6). Miret i Sans does, however, offer evidence of the provenance of the rumor, citing the 1306 rhymed chronicle by Guillaume Guiart, based principally on the Grandes Chroniques de France composed at Saint-Denis, and for the reign of Louis IX, on the Gesta Ludovici of ­Guillaume de Nangis: “Apres eslit li roi messages / Qu’en Provence querre ­destine / Biatriz la suer la reyne, / Qui, esbahie et entreprise, / Yert du roi ­d’Arragon assise; / Car il vouloit qu’il li pléust / C’un sien fil à fame l’éust / Tout n’i fust èle consentant. / Mez enz en l’eure qu’il entant /

422

31

32 33 34 35

36 37 38 39

40 41 42 43

44

Notes to pages 177–80 Du roi saint Loïs la prière, / S’en va en sa terre arrière”; see Collection des chroniques nationales françaises, vols. 7 and 8. “Friedrich II antwortet auf die an ihn gebrachten wünsche des ­prinzen Alfons von Castilien, namentlich wegen der gräfin der Provence (1245–1246): Ad id autem, quod pro comitissa Provincie etc.... magistro ­hospitalis etc. dirigi nostre celsitudinis apices postulasti, scire te volumus, quod nuncio nostro ad eundum magistrum in proximo destinando inter alia specialiter comittimus” in Winkelmann, Acta Imperii inedita, doc. 47 (2.51). There are lacunae in the text that make it difficult to ­ascertain the exact nature of Alfonso’s enquiry, but it also appears that Frederick was not willing to elaborate on the matter at this point. See also Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,4 n. 14752. Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, doc. 4435 (3.426); Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2,4 n. 14056. Gesta Ludovici, 20.354; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 153. Archivio di Stato di Torino, Testamenti, vol. 1, doc. 5; cited in Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 224. Testament of Amadeus IV, 19 September 1252: “It is my will and I command that my minor daughter Beatrice, enter the monastery of Le B ­ etton and there become a nun, and for her reception there and my own s­ epulchre and for the salvation of my soul and that of my ancestors, I give and ­bequeath to the monastery of Le Betton where I have chosen my s­ epulchre and wish to be interred” in Archivio di Stato di Torino, T ­ estamenti, vol. 1, doc. 5; published in Ripart, “L’Anneau de Saint Maurice,” 90. Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 225–7. Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 227, n. 70. Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 279–80. Servion, Gestez: “ne laissa que sa seur, nommee Contense, la quelle nestoit encores mariee, & sy ne susida pas ala conte, car nulle fillie ne sucesde a leritage de Sauoye par constitucions” (1.281). Wurstemberger, Peter der Zweite, vol. 4, docs. 600–605, 607, 607a, 609; cited in Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 303, n. 79. Guillem and his holdings in Gascony are mentioned prominently in the Llibre dels feits, chap. 33 (73–4). Rymer, Foedera, I.I.178. Rymer, Foedera, 31 March 1254, 20 April 1254 (I.I.179–80); Matthew Paris, Chronica majora, 5.397; Marsh, English Rule, 144–9; O’Callaghan, Learned King, 151–2; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 92–9. Rymer, Foedera, I.I.180. Though the agreement does not specify the name of Henry’s daughter, this may be ascertained from the fact that scarcely a year earlier, Henry had attempted to marry Beatrice to Alfonso de Aragón, Jaime I’s oldest son with his first wife, Leonor of Castile, who had been



Notes to pages 180–3

45

46 47

48

49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

423

effectively supplanted by the children of his second wife, V ­ iolante of Hungary; see “De Matrimonio inter primogenitum Regis Aragoniae & ­Beatricem filiam Regis” in Rymer, Foedera, 24 May 1253 (I.I.174). “De maritagio filae nostrae consulit idem Comes [Ricardum Comitem Cornubiae], ut per Nuncios eosdem, sub omni verborum cautela, respondeatur: Et super hoc dicere poterunt iidem Nuncii quod, cum de terris, quas dictus Rex Castellae dederit, vel daturis fit Domino Emanueli fratri suo, nullam notitiam habeamus” in Rymer, Foedera, I.II.6–7. Powicke, Thirteenth Century, 118. Though Zurita, Anales, 3.60.601, and others claim the infante’s marriage to Constance took place several days before his death and was never ­consecrated, de Sagarra, “Noticias y documentos inéditos referentes al infante don Alfonso,” publishes the infante’s will, given on 8 August 1256, in which Constance appears as “domina Constancia uxor nostra” (296). Constance later married Diego López de Haro, lord of Vizcaya; see Labayru y Goicoechea, Historia general del señorío de Bizcaya, 2.239; ­Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 133. Muntaner, Crónica, chap. 183 (348): “E lo senyor rey ... dona-li per muller de les honrrades donzelles qui filla de rey no fos, qui fos en Espanya, ço es a saber, madona Guillelma de Muncada, filla den Gasto de Biarn.” Pedro’s death on 30 August 1296 during the siege of Lleó (Majorca) is recounted by Muntaner in chap. 189 (357-8). See also Zurita, Anales, 3.72.685 and 5.22.504. Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 378. MHE, doc. 135 (1.297–303): “Don Gaston, vizconde de Beart, vasallo del Rey, conf.” (302). For relations between Manfred and the House of Savoy, see del Giudice, La famiglia di re Manfredi. Girona y Llagustera, “Mullerament de l’infant En Pere,” doc. 2 (265–6). ACA, Reg. 12, fol. 33, cited in Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 338, n. 1. See Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 304. See Glover, “L’Abbaye du Betton en Maurienne.” ACA, Reg. 15, fol. 21, cited in Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 389, n. 1. See Cox, Eagles of Savoy, chap. 7.V, “The Wars in Western Helvitia and the Death of Pierre,” 363–72. See Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, docs. 19, 21 (241–3). Cartulaire des comtes de Bourgogne, docs. 239 (15 April 1270), 244 (21 July 1272). Cox in Dictionary of the Middle Ages, s.v. “Burgundy, County of” (2.424–6). His first wife was Matilda de Mehun-sur-Yevre and Burgundy (d. 1242); his second was Isabel of Courtenay (c. 1219–57); and third was Laurette de Commercy (c. 1240–75).

424

Notes to pages 183–4

62 Isabel of Courtenay’s father, Robert I of Courtenay, was the younger son of the emperor of Constantinople, Pierre II de Courtenay (1155–1219), who, with his second wife Yolande de Hainaut (1175–1219), had fourteen children, the sixth of whom was Yolande de Courtenay (c. 1200–1233), married in 1215 to Andras II, King of Hungary (1176–1235); their ­daughter, Violante of Hungary (1215–51), was the mother of Violante and Constanza of Aragón. Pierre de Chalon was, then, the second cousin of Violante and Constanza’s mother. 63 Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 201–2, 363–7. 64 Segovia, 21 September 1258: Alfonso X accepts Hugo IV, Duke of ­Burgundy, as his vassal for the sum of ten thousand maravedís to be paid annually to him and his heirs. On the same day, he promises Hugh four thousand marks of silver to be paid to him in Paris by 8 September 1259. In case of non-payment, Hugh is free to renounce his vassalage; published in Pérard, Recueil de plusieurs pieces curieuses, 491–2; trans. in Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 557; Petit, L’Histoire des ducs de Bourgogne, 5.45–6, 55–6; Ballesteros, “Itinerario,” 213 and Alfonso X, 217, 230–1. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 231, suspects Hugh was personally knighted by Alfonso and that he may have been present at the cortes of Toledo early in 1259. Hugh confirms documents from the royal chancery as “D. Hugo, Duque de Borgoña” as early as 27 July 1259 and as late as 3 August 1274, though he died on 27 October 1272! See MHE, doc. 68 (1.149–51) and doc. 135 (1.297–303). 65 Petit, L’Histoire des ducs de Bourgogne, 5.44–66, 67–88; Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 379. 66 Archivio di Stato di Torino, Testamenti, vol. 1, doc. 16; cited in Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 369, n. 110. 67 Servion, Gestez: “& sy ne susida pas ala conte, car nulle fillie ne sucesde a leritage de Sauoye par constitucions. Et apres sust damoiselle ­Contenze mariee a messire Bo[u]yer conte de Chalon, du quel ell neust nulz ­enfans” (1.281). 68 Archivio di Stato di Torino, Inventario Matrimoni dei Sovrani, vol. 2, doc. 6, and Principi del Sangue, vol. 1, doc. 10; cited in Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 376, n. 4. 69 Archivio di Stato di Torino, Traités anciens, vol. 1, doc. 6; cited in Cox, ­Eagles of Savoy, 382, n. 20. See also the unedited Chronique de la Maison de Savoye by Jean “Cabaret” d’Orronville: “Comme le Comte Philippe partit sa terre a sez trois nepveux Thomas, Ame et Loys, et comme il voullut que son second nepveux Ame fut Conte de Savoye apres luy” (fols. 97–98), published in Ripart, “L’Anneau de Saint Maurice,” 86–7. 70 Archivio di Stato di Torino, Traités anciens, vol. 1, doc. 6; cited by Cox, ­Eagles of Savoy, 382, n. 20.



Notes to pages 184–8 71 72 73 74 75

76 77 78 79

80 81 82

83 84 85 86 87

88

425

Servion, Gestez, 1.281. Cartulaire des comtes de Bourgogne, doc. 258 (228–9). Cartulaire des comtes de Bourgogne, doc. 245 (211–14). See Servion, Gestez: “messire Bo[u]yer conte de Chalon ... Le dit conte Bo[u]yer de Chalon” (1.281). Otto IV (d. 1303) was the first son and heir of Hugh III de Chalon and Alix of Merano. Hugh’s parents were Jean le Sage and his first wife ­Matilda. When Hugh died in 1266, Alix married Philippe of Savoy. Thus Otto was Pierre’s liege lord and half-brother. Jean (1243–1309) was the first and Etienne (d. 1302) the third son of Jean le Sage and his second wife, Isabel of Courtenay. Servion, Gestez: “Et apres fust damoiselle Contenze mariee a messire Bo[u]yer conte de Chalon, du quel elle neust nulz enfans” (1.281). Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 404. Annales Placentini Gibellini: “Eodem tempore [end of September 1270] ambaxatores regis Castelle erant in Lombardia per ipso domino rege et locuti fuerunt marchioni Montisferrati et aliis pluribus ­magnatibus Lombardie” (18.549); Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5513d; ­Ballesteros, ­Alfonso X, 542–3, who thinks the connection between William and ­Alfonso may have occurred as early as 1269 when Alfonso’s son, ­Fernando de la Cerda, married Blanche, daughter of Louis IX, in Burgos. Ágreda, 22 March 1271, published in Benvenuto de Sancto Giorgio, Historia Montisferrati, 23.391; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5516. Benvenuto de Sancto Giorgio, Historia Montisferrati, 23.391; Annales ­Placentini Gibellini, 18.549, 553–4; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5519. Benvenuto de Sancto Giorgio, Historia Montisferrati, 23.392; Annales ­Placentini Gibellini, 18.553; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5519. ­Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 543, mistakenly refers to Tomasino as “conde Tomás de ­Saboya,” a title that was held at this time by his uncle Philippe. Benvenuto de Sancto Giorgio, Historia Montisferrati, 23.392; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5520. Annales Placentini Gibellini, 18.555; Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,1,2 n. 5520. Loaysa, Crónica, 20. Kinkade, “Alfonso X, Cantiga 235,” 305–7. Ballesteros, Alfonso X: “Acuciado por el afán de tener descendencia masculina, el infante Don Manuel casó con la condesa de Saboya” (772); ­Lomax, “Padre”: “No hay datos sobre la boda, ni sobre su motivo ... Puede pensarse que ... Manuel sólo pensara en conseguir otro heredero ... Alfonso siempre necesitaba relacionar a sus partidarios italianos y ­alemanes, y para ello asegurarse la amistad de los feudatarios que ­controlaban los puertos alpinos” (174). Potthast, Regesta: Lausannam, 6 October (1700).

426

Notes to pages 188–90

89 Under the circumstances, the conjecture set forth by Lomax, “Padre,” 174, that Alfonso, still interested in a connection with the House of Savoy to further his imperial ambitions, used Infante Manuel “como novio y anzuelo,” as bait to secure the marriage, is untenable. 90 Chevalier, Regeste dauphinois, doc. 11433 (2.923). Cox, Eagles of Savoy, asserts that “Contesson seems to have been wed soon afterwards to ­Bertrand, sire of Moirans in the Viennois” (392, n. 36), but the text clearly states that Bertrand “fait des legs ... a sa femme Tybort” so that he was already married and his wife, Tybort, was still alive. 91 Ayala Martínez, “Alfonso X: Beaucaire”: “Alfonso no quiso dejar escapar ningún eventual aliado ... A antiguos proyectos de alianza sumó ahora la realidad de un ventajoso matrimonio” (24). 92 Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 111. 93 Westminster, 4 May 1275: “Littera Gregorio Papae rogatoria, quod ­Alphonsi Romanorum Regis jus illesum conservaret in Romano Imperio” in Rymer, Foedera, 1.2.145. 94 Westminister, 5 May 1275: “Littera Alphonso Romanorum Regi de adjuvando ipsum contra Radolphum de Alemania, Comitem de Hapsburg” in Rymer, Foedera, 1.2.146; see also Ayala Martínez, “Alfonso X: Beaucaire,” 26. 95 Aquian.[?] in Festo beati Martini (11 November 1275): “De Comite ­Sabaudia, Guerram faciente cum Rege Alemaniae, & pluribus allis ­Magnatibus” in ­Rymer, Foedera, 1.2.151. 96 Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 413 and 423. 97 “Et si por alguna razón quisiesse ella más, los quatro mill marcos de plata quel otorgué por la donación de casamiento et mill sietezientas l­ ibras de tornesos que me prestó cuando casé con ella, que ge lo den de los mios bienes” in Torres Fontes, “Testamento del infante don Manuel,” 17. 98 Zaragoza, April 1312: “Jacobus, etc. Nobili et egregio viro Barraldo filio egregii viri Comitis de Vellino et domino de Montillis ... Cum sicut nobis fuit relatum ex parte nobilis Johannis filii infantis Emanuelis quondam generi nostri sint in posse vestro quedam instrumenta sive privilegia ­facientia pro comitatu de Veneri in quo comitatu dictus nobilis J­ ohannis ex succesione matris sue quondam comitisse de Sauoya asserit jus habere” in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 238 (406). 99 Bertrand is first mentioned as count of Avellino in a document dated 15 March 1272, published in del Giudice, Codice diplomatico del regno di Carlo 1. e 2. d’Angio ... dal 1265 al 1309, 2.98, cited in Böhmer, Regesta Imperii, V,2, doc. 14579 (2105). Zurita, Anales, cites him as one who was rewarded by Charles of Anjou for his support in the Battle of Benevento against Conradin, August 1268: “Mercedes que hizo el rey a los que contra Conradino le sirvieron. Estos fueron ... Beltrán de Baucio, conde de Avellino” (3.78.690). Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, mistakenly identifies him as “hermano de Beatriz de Saboya” (712).



Notes to page 190

427

100 Perpignan, August 1305: “De Bernardo de Sarriá a Jaime II, sobre el matrimonio de Don Juan con Doña Constanza de Aragón,” “... Sapie la vostre alte senhorie que can fom a Perpinha parlam ab lo Conde Bely e ab los messatgers de don Johan ... quel Comde que remangue a N ­ arbone” in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 129 (321–2); Huete, 5 September 1305: “Carta de gracias de Don Juan a Doña Blanca, la reina de Aragón; por haber consentido en su matrimonio con Doña Constanza”: “A la muy noble e mucho alta sennora Reyna de Aragon. Sennora yo don Johan fijo del infante don Manuel me acomiendo mucho en la uuestra gracia como a madre e como a sennora para qui cobdicio mucha vida e mucha salut e a qui yo servire siempre e so tenudo de faser todas las cosas que ­mandaredes e por bien touieredes. Sennora vi uuestra carta que me enuiastes con Catalin criado de la condesa mi madre en que desia que el Conde de Avelin mio Tio e el fablaron con el Rey e conuusco sobre el matrimonio de la noble infanta dona Costança uuestra fija e de mi e el Rey e uos que les dieredes respuesta de palaura sobre ello segund Catalin me diria e yo quel creuiese de lo que me diria de la uuestra parte en esta rason” in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 134 (325–6). Constanza was only six years old in 1306, and the marriage itself was postponed ­until she reached the age of twelve in 1312. 101 Gaibrois de Ballesteros, “Los testamentos inéditos de Juan Manuel,” 31 May 1339 (43) and 14 August 1340 (50). 102 Comtat Venaissin, the modern département of Vaucluse, is bounded on the north and northeast by Dauphiné, on the south by the Durance River, on the east by Provence, and on the west by the Rhône, with its capital at Carpentras. It was ceded to the papacy in 1218 by Count Raymond VII, count of Toulouse and again in 1274 by Philippe III. Contesson’s grandmother, Sybille d’Anduze, was the niece of Raymond VII. Gaibrois de Ballesteros, “Los testamentos inéditos de don Juan Manuel,” does not identify Benexi, leaving the name italicized in her transcription. 103 Tate and MacPherson, eds., Libro de los estados, 298, n. 100, claim that the first nobleman accorded this status was Alvar Núñez Osorio, conde de Trastámara, who received it from Alfonso XI around 1328, but the Crónica del rey Don Sancho, records that the title was first given in 1287 to “don Lope Diaz, conde de Haro, señor de Vizcaya” (74), and is confirmed by Jofré de Loaysa, Crónica, “constituit honoriffice comitem dompnum ­­Lupum Viscaye dominum, qui tunc totam habebat disponere domum regis et agenda ipsius” (26). 104 Libro de los estados: “Et este es vn estado muy est[r]anno et caben en el muchas maneras de omnes; ca en muchas tier[r]as acaesce que los infantes, fijos de los reys, son condes, et otros condes ay que son mas ricos et mas poderosos que algunos duques, et avn que algunos reys; et otros condes ay que an abes mas de çinquenta caualleros” (1.384)

428

Notes to pages 191–4

105 Kinkade, “Alfonso X, Cantiga 235,” 304–8. 106 Crónica de Alfonso X, 67.190–1 and Annex I, 245–6. See also Craddock, “Dynasty in Dispute,” 202, and Kinkade, “Alfonso X, Cantiga 235,” 308–11. 7. Problems of Succession: 1276–82 1 CAX, 64.183–5; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 303–6. 2 CAX, 65.185–7. 3 See Craddock, “Cronología,” 400–17; MacDonald, “Alfonso the Learned and Succession,” 647–53; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 306–8. 4 DIAX, 472–4. 5 CAX, 67.190. 6 “E que tenía que era bien pertenesçiente para seer [rey], pero que avría su acuerdo et sobre esto que daría a ello respuesta. Et mandó llamar al ynfante don Manuel e otros de su consejo e díxoles la fabla que don Lope Díaz fiziera con él sobre fecho de don Sancho e preguntóles quél consejauan en ello. Et todos los que estauan y dubdaron mucho en este consejo. Et don Manuel díxol: ’señor, el árbol de los reyes non se pierde por postura nin se desereda por y al que viene por natura. E si el mayor que viene del árbol fallece, deue fincar la rama de so él en somo. E tres cosas son que non son postura: ley nin rey nin regno. E cosa que sea fecha contra cualquiera de estas cosas non vale nin deue ser tenida nin guardada, e así, pues que el infante don Ferrando finó, que era el más cercano del mayor de todos sus hermanos e que éste deuía heredar los reynos después de los días del rey e non otro ninguno” (CAX, 67.190–1.) 7 See the interpolated text of the Biblioteca del Real Monasterio de San Lorenzo de El Escorial, Ms. M.II.2, f. 79r, in González Jiménez, ed., CAX, Anexo I (245–6). 8 The Cuarta crónica general, edited by the Marqués de la Fuensanta del Valle in Colección de documentos inéditos para la historia de España, vols. 105 and 106 (Madrid, 1893), is described by Menéndez Pidal in Crónicas generales de España, 141–7, where he states that the work, though titled “Crónica de España que recopiló Don Gonzalo de Hinoxosa obispo de Burgos en el año de MCDLIV,” is anonymous (142). See also Diego Catalán, “El Toledano romanzado,” 9–102. 9 “... demandaua por derecho e por ante jueces, a vista de Castilla e de León, e ficieron alcaldes que judgasen este pleyto, e pusieron a abogados que lo razonasen e toviesen la voz de las partes. E fueron los alcaldes el infante don Manuel e Diego López de Sazedo. E fueron los abogados Juan Gato de Çamora e Agostín Pérez” (106.17). 10 Cf. Salazar, Historia genealógica de la Casa de Lara, 3.34; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 91, 147 et passim.



Notes to pages 194–7

429

11 CAX, 31.103. 12 CAX, 59.171. 13 Cf. Nieto Soria, “Algunas consideraciones,” 216; cited in González Jiménez, “Sancho IV, infante,” doc. 10 (177). 14 Cited by Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 2.215–16, where she asserts that “Juan Gato figura mucho en las cuentas de los primeros años del ­reinado de Sancho como juez de Salamanca” (2.216, n.1). 15 In Fernández Duro, Memorias históricas de la ciudad de Zamora, 3.633. 16 “[E] mandó prender luego a uno que desian Juan Gato, que fuera alcalde del rey, e sin lo oyr mandolo matar” (1.63); cited by Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 2.216, n. 1. 17 Cf. Linehan, Spanish Church, 115. 18 Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, 2 March 1262, doc. 116 (cxxi-cxxii). 19 Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 223–4. 20 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 487. Bishop Martín was indeed Fernando’s ­godfather, but Bishop Agustín was not; cf. González Jiménez, “El Infante Don ­Fernando,” doc. 7 (535). 21 CAX, 19.57. 22 CAX, 41.119; 42.121–2; 44.127. 23 CAX, 76.223. 24 Alfonso’s 1 July 1274 letter addressing the complaint and the results of ­Infante Manuel’s 10 March 1276 investigation are published in Lafont ­Mateo, Pampliega, Torrespadierne y Santiuste, doc. 58 (241–6), for which ­Lafont provides no provenance. Alfonso’s letter is not catalogued in the DIAX. 25 Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 842. 26 González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 308–12. 27 DAAX, doc. 429 (452–3). In Manuel’s last will and testament, he refers to Juan Bretón as “mio cauallero,” naming him as an executor of his will. 28 See O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María, 110–13. 29 See DA, doc. 35. 30 Zurita, Anales, 4.4.19–20 and 4.8.30. 31 Langlois, Règne de Philippe III, 105, relying entirely on the rhymed chronicle of an eyewitness, Guillaume Anelier de Toulouse, Histoire de la guerre de Navarre, “Segunt que audi dire, foro .CCC. millers” (v. 4795, p. 308), declares that Philippe assembled an army “qui comptait, selon les on-dit, trois cent mille hommes,” a highly inflated figure repeated in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 800. 32 Carlos, Prince of Viana (1421–61), the son of Juan II of Aragón and ­author of the Crónica de los reyes de Navarra, claims “el conde de Artois, con grant cura de complir la voluntat del Rey, llevó consigo toda la dicha gente, en que había cerca de diez mil de a caballo, e veinte mil peones” (149); a footnote to this same figure states “cien mil, dicen tres códices”; Moret, Annales de Navarra, 3.201, who usually follows Carlos, here cites the chronicle of Guillaume de Nangis: “Veinte mil combatientes entre

430

Notes to pages 197–8

infantes y caballos dice que le dió el rey Guillermo Nangio, que al tiempo escribía”; Langlois, Règne de Philippe III, 103, mentions the same figures with the remark “dit-on”; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 795–6, also repeats them, asserting at the same time that Infante Fadrique led the Castilian army in Navarre with his son-in-law, but without any documentary evidence to support this. Guillaume Anelier’s rhymed chronicle, v. 4305 (276), reports that the troops arrived in Pamplona in August 1276; Moret, Annales de Navarra, says 2 September (3.208). 33 Carlos, Prince of Viana, Crónica de los reyes de Navarra: “el rey de Castilla invió el socorro de quatro mil de a caballo e quarenta mil peones, con los dichos D. Diego de Vizcaya y D. Jimen Ruiz señor de los Cameros” (148). Moret, Annales de Navarra, however, while citing the prince, argues that these figures represent a “suma poco creíble, si la infantería no se componía en mucha parte de milicias concejiles arrebatadamente sacadas; porque la guerra de Andalucía aún no había del todo cesado” (3.205). The exploits and deceptions practised in this context by Simón Ruiz and Lope Díaz de Haro and their role in the subsequent civil war in Navarre are detailed by the Provençal troubadour and eye witness Guillaume Anelier de Toulouse in Histoire de la guerre de Navarre, edited with copious notes by Francisque Michel, a work containing invaluable information found nowhere else for the period under consideration. 34 “E dende, a poco tiempo, el rey de Castilla mató al dicho D. Jimen Ruiz de los Cameros, por que mas presto non socorrió a los de la Navarrería” (151). Moret, Annales de Navarra, 3.218, repeats this information citing Carlos. Neither Ballesteros nor González Jiménez in Alfonso X refers to the role of Simón Ruiz in Navarre’s civil war as reported by Carlos, Prince of Viana, though González Jiménez lists the Crónica de los reyes de Navarra in his bibliography, 459. 35 “D. Lop Diaz seinnor de Vizcaya, e D. Simon Roiz seinnor de los Cameros, e com Diago Lopiz de Haro, D. Pere Diaz e D. Muinno Diaz de Castainneda, e D. Pedro Manrique, e D. Vela Ladron de Guevara, D. Lope Descainno, e D. Gonzalvo Gómez de Manzanedo, e D. Gomez Gil de Villalobos, D. Pedro Gomez Descainno, e D. Rodrigo Rodriguez, e com todos los otros ricos omes e cabailleros de lur ayuda ... e que non fagan ni assienten pleito nenguno de avenencia ni paz com el rey de Castieilla, ni com outro nenguno, por razon de dicho rey de Castieilla sin conseio de D. Simon e D. Lop, e de los otros ricos omes antedichos de lur ayuda ... Et estos paramientos, e convenciones antedichas, deben seer guardadas e mantenidas entre ambas las partidas, como dicho es de suso, ata la primera fiesta de Santa Maria Magdalena que viene,” Archivo de Navarra, caj. 3, doc. 129, in Yanguas y Miranda, Diccionario de antigüedades del reino de Navarra, 3.50–2.



Notes to pages 198–9

431

36 See Daumet, Mémoire, 157–8; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 803, cites Daumet but not the Cartulario de Don Felipe III, rey de Francia, which contains a substantial number of documents sent by Philippe III to his administrators in Navarre indicating that not only the Laras but perhaps even the Haros were involved with the French monarch at this time; cf. no. 25: “Del mismo rey D. Felipe al gobernador de Navarra, para que prohiba la estancia en Navarra a Lope Díez [sic], su hermano y sus compañeros,” dated Paris, 20 September 1276: “Et si nos arequis le deuent dit Lop Die, que nos le sofre sains ademorer en reaume de Nauarre par .VII. mois, mes nos ne leur auon pas volu otroler” (21). 37 “E pois entrou in Castela, veron todos aly, / toda-las gentes da terra, que lle dizian assy: / ’sennor, tan bon dia vosco’” (st. 11abc). 38 “E axi ell sen tornat en Castella ab la regina e ab sos infants, hon hagren gran plaer e gran goig los seus sotsmesos com lo hagren cobrat” (Muntaner, Crónica, 24.50). 39 “Mas depois, creed’ a my, / nunca assy foi vendudo Rey Don Sanch’ en Portugal” (st. 11cd). On 24 July 1245, Sancho II of Portugal (1223–48) was deposed at the Council of Lyons by Pope Innocent IV in a papal bull commanding the Portuguese people to pay homage to Sancho’s brother, Alfonso, count of Boulogne. The parallels that Alfonso X drew between the defection of many of the Portuguese nobility, who travelled to Paris in the fall of 1245 to swear allegiance to Alfonso, and the desertion of the Castilian nobility to Philippe III thirty years later must have seemed particularly ominous, since Alfonso X was related to Sancho II, a first cousin of his father, Fernando III, and had witnessed at first hand the tragedy of his royal relative who was to end his days in exile in Toledo in January 1248; see CAX, 7.19–22, and commentary by González Jiménez. See also Peters, “Rex inutilis: Sancho II of Portugal,” 255–305; Doña Mencía de Haro, Sancho’s widow and half-sister of Diego López III de Haro, lord of Vizcaya, was a favourite of Alfonso’s and, according to the CAX, 29.97–8, was Fernando de la Cerda’s godmother; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 146–7. 40 “Ca os mais dos ricos omes se juraron, per com’ eu / sei, por deitaren do reyno et que ficasse por seu, / que xo entre ssi partissen; mas de fazer lles foi greu; / ca Deus lo alçou na cima et eles baixou no val” (st. 12). 41 “E depois, quand’ en Bitoira morou un an’ e un mes, / jazendo mui mal doente, contra el o Rey frances / se moveu con mui gran gente; mas depois foi mais cortes / ca Deus desfez o seu feito, com’ agua desfaz o sal” (st. 13). The statement “a year and a month,” falling as it does at the end of a verse, is a prime example of poetic license corresponding more accurately to the demands of the rhyme scheme in -es than to any attempt at chronological precision, since the king was demonstrably in Vitoria by 5 September 1276, leaving there for Burgos in May 1277, some

432

42

43

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53

54 55

Notes to pages 199–201 nine months later, to attend the cortes. In this same context, however, we might also consider the geographical proximity of Burgos to Vitoria, a little more than one hundred kilometres to the northeast, a distance that could be traversed fairly quickly, leading us to generalize that Alfonso X was in the area of Vitoria for a year and a month. See Anonymum Sancti Martialis Chronicon: “Eodem anno, Philippus, rex Francorum, mense novembris circa festum beati Martini [11 November], in Franciam cum exercitu suo redit, nec eundo in Hispaniam Salvaterram non transit” (803); MGH SS, 26:592–5; see also Langlois, Règne de Philippe III, 105–7, and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 800–801. The treaties signed on “vii Idus novembris” (4 November 1276) are ­published in Guillaume Anelier de Toulouse, Histoire de la guerre de Navarre, 651–3. See also Daumet, Mémoire, 40–7; Langlois, Règne de Philippe III, 107–8; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 804–6. The disastrous campaigns against ­Castile and later Aragon (1284–85) led by the son of Louis IX are recalled with scorn in the contemporary rhymed chronicle Chroniques de Saint Magloire (c. 1300): “Et en Espaingne et en Sauveterre / Ala ses fiuz folie querre” (vv. 118–19). See DA, doc. 36. See DA, doc. 37. See DA, doc. 38. See DA, doc. 39. See Cerdá, “Fueros municipales.” See DIAX, docs. 1681 (282), 1843 (309), 1870 (315), and 1900 (320). See DA, doc. 40. Cf. Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, 32. Catálogo de los manuscritos e incunables de la Catedral de Córdoba, 107, ­referenced but not published by González Jiménez, DIAX, doc. 3482 (612). In Cantiga 209, Alfonso recounts that “I lay in Vitoria, so ill that all b ­ elieved I should die there and did not expect me to recover. For such a pain ­afflicted me that I believed it to be mortal” (sts. 3–4). Rejecting his physicians’ advice to apply hot towels, the king sent for a copy of the Cantigas: “They put it on me and immediately I lay in peace” (st. 5). Though the nature of the infirmity is not disclosed in the cantiga, Martínez, Alfonso X, 275–84, makes a strong case for a diagnosis of “hidropesía,” or dropsy, symptoms of a disease from which Alfonso’s father, Fernand III, had died, according to Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 995. See also Keller and Kinkade, ­“Iconography and Literature,” 348–52. See Francisco Olmos, “La moneda en la Castilla bajomedieval,” 290–3. “Al muy sancto padre e sennor don Johan por la graçia de Dios, apostoligo de la sancta Eglesia de Roma. Nos Inffante don Manuel hermano del Rey de Castiella e el inffante don Johan ffijo desse mismo Rey ...” in Escudero



Notes to pages 201–4

56

57

58 59 60 61 62 63

64

65

66

67

433

de la Peña, “Súplica hecha al Papa Juan XXI,” 58–60; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 836–7. “E pois sayr de Castela, el Rey con mui gran sabor / ouve d’ir aa fronteira; mas a mui bõa Sennor / non quis que enton y fosse, se non sãasse mellor; / porend’ en todo o corpo lle deu febre geeral” (st.16). O’Callaghan, Cortes of Castile-León, states that “[t]he most popular period for convocation was the Easter season, from the beginning of Lent until Pentecost, when the cortes met nineteen times,” including the cortes of Burgos 1277 (67, n. 17); Easter in that year was celebrated on 28 March so that Pentecost, seven weeks later, must have fallen on 16 May; B ­ allesteros, Alfonso X, 841, claims with no evidence that the cortes of Burgos lasted until the end of the year, while González Jiménez, Alfonso X, seems to ­indicate that the cortes continued until September (314–16). See Daumet, Mémoire, 33–4, and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 821–2. Cf. González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 321. CAX, 68.194. González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 316–22; Martínez, Alfonso X, 408–18. Yanguas y Miranda, Diccionario de antigüedades, 3.49–53. “Ballesteros ... se dejó engañar por una pista falsa: la participación en la conspiración de don Lope Díaz de Haro, lo que provocaría su posterior huida del reino al ser descubierta por el rey” (Alfonso X, 319). See Daumet, Mémoire, 157–8; Cartulario de Don Felipe III, doc. 25 (Paris, 20 September 1276), in which Philippe III writes to the governor of Navarre concerning Lope Díaz de Haro: “Et si nos arequis le deuent dit Lop Die, que nos le sofre sains ademorer en reaume de Nauarre par .VII. mois, mes nos ne leur auon pas volu otroler” (21). On 8 November 1282, Alfonso disinherited Sancho, citing among other things in his decree that the young rebel had accused him of murdering Fadrique “sin causa”; see a translation of the Latin text published by Zurita, Indices, 1:264; see also González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 353. The CAX, 76.223, cites the murder of Fadrique as one of the principal causes of the rebellion. Burgos, 7 julio 1277: “El infante don Manuel conf.... El infante don Johan, fijo del rey e su alférez, conf. El infante don Sancho, fijo mayor del rey e su mayordomo, con.” in DAAX, doc. 434 (456–8). “Noverint universi, praesentem paginam inspecturi, quod nos i­ nfans ­Emanuel filius inclitae recordationis Domini Fernandi, quondam ­illustris Regis Castellae & Legionis, ... literas nobilis memoriae Domini ­Henrici, quondam Regis Anglorum illustris, ... videmus, non abolitas, non deletas, non cancellatas, nec in parte sui aliqua vitiatas; quarum tenor inferius scribitur de verbo ad verbum per ordinem, isto modo: ... In ­quorum ­omnium Testimonium valiturum perpetuo nos infans

434

68

69 70

71

72 73 74

75

76 77 78 79

80

81

Notes to pages 204–6 Emanuel, ... praesenti paginae nostra sigilla duximus apponenda. Dat. Burg. Kal. ­Augusti, anno gratiae 1277” in Rymer, Foedera, 1.2.160. Although the invasion of 1277 is not recorded by the CAX, it is fully ­described by Ibn Abi Zar, Rawd al-Qirtas, 608–18, who is cited extensively by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 827–35; see also González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 322–4. See Linehan, Spanish Church, 217–20; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 841–48. Burgos, 8 November 1277: “Otorgo e prometo a Vos el mas noble Padre e Señor D. Alfonso, ... que si alguna cosa aviniere de Vos (lo que Dios no quiera) ante aquel Monesterio, ... fuese acabado, que yo la cumpla e lo acabe como ansi debe ser” in Loperráez, Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma, doc. 76 (3.212). Burgos, 11 November 1277: “El Infante D. Manuel, hermano del Rey e su Maiordomo maior, conf. El Infante D. Ioan, fijo del Rey e su Alferez, conf.” in Loperráez, Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma, doc. 77 (3.212–14). Anales toledanos III, ed. Flórez, in España sagrada (1767), 23.419–20. Anales toledanos III, 173. “... salió la reyna de Segouia e con ella donna Blanca et leuaron consigo aquellos don Alfonso e don Ferrando. E pasaron el puerto e fueron a Vzeda e dende a Guadalajara e a Hita et Atiença et a Medina[Çeli]. E dende fueron a Hariza, que es en el regno de Aragón, e el rey don ­Pedro veno y a leuólos consigo a Calatayud” (68.193). Cf. Soldevila, Pere el Gran, 2.233, originally published between 1950 and 1962 as vols. XI, XIII, XVI, and XVII of the Memòries de la Secció Històrico-Arqueològica and later as two volumes in 1995. ACA, Cancillería, Reg. 47, fol. 85r; published in MHE, doc. 143 (1.325–6), and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 850, 861, who does not reveal his source. Cf. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 863. Cf. Martínez Ferrando, Documentación Pedro el Grande, 113–16. “... y passó a Hariza a donde se fue a ver con ella el rey su hermano. Esto fue a ocho de Enero de mil y dozientos y setenta y siete” (Zurita, Anales, 4.159). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 786. González Jiménez, Alfonso X, appears to be unaware of the Aragonese chancery chronometry, with the remark that Ballesteros “justificaba su interpretación con el razonamiento ingenioso de que esta noticia procedia, tal vez, de Aragón” (376). Let several examples suffice: MHE, doc. 142 (1.325): “Tarazona, 2 March 1278 [recte 1279]”; doc. 143 (1.326): “Borja, 18 March 1278 [recte 1279]”; doc, 152 (1.338–9): “Biar, 2 February 1279 [recte 1280]”; doc. 154 (1.342): ­“Algeciras, 25 February 1279 [recte 1280]. But also see two instances where the MHE gives the correct date and Ballesteros changes it: doc. 167 (2.15): “Valencia 20 December 1279,” which Ballesteros records as



Notes to pages 206–7

82

83

84

85

86

87 88

435

14 December 1278 by inference since, without giving the date of the document, he places it between two others that are dated 1278; doc. 168 (2.16–17): “San Mateo (Valencia), 13 January 1280,” which he records as “15 January 1279.” Ballesteros, Alfonso X, presumably in an attempt to coordinate the date of the letter with the king of Aragon’s itinerary, states that the message was despatched from Valencia (876) where Pedro III resided from October 1277 to May 1278; he was, however, in Barcelona in January 1279. “[E] u cuidavan que morto era, foi-sse dessa vez / dereit’ a Valedolide ... Mas ante quis que en tal / Ponto veess’ a seu feito, que non ouvess’ y joyz / que de vida o julgasse, e a Sant’ Anperadriz / lle fez ben sentir a morte” (sts. 15abc–16abc). On this date Alfonso sent a letter from Peñafiel to the Cathedral of ­Córdoba in which he expressed his desire to go to the frontier: “Et agora sere yo ayna alla en la tierra, si Dios quiere,” a wish that corresponds ­exactly to the sentiment expressed in Cantiga 235, st. 16ab: “E pois sayr de Castela, el Rey con mui gran sabor / ouve d’ir aa fronteira”; cf. DAAX, doc. 437 (460). See DIAX, doc. 3001 (519); see also Agustí y Casanovas, Voltes Bou, and Vives, Manual de cronología española y universal, 190. We should not, in the case of such a profoundly pious individual as Alfonso, discount the symbolic significance of arriving in Valladolid before Palm Sunday, there to begin a bout of suffering during Holy Week, the most solemn period in the Christian calendar, which would parallel the sufferings of Jesus and eventually lead up to the central focus of Cantiga 235, the miraculous healing on Easter Sunday coinciding with the Resurrection of Christ. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, in a subchapter entitled “La enfermedad del rey” (787–9), inexplicably assigns the Valladolid episode, with the king’s illness, recovery, and desire to return to Andalusia, to the year 1276; Procter, Alfonso X of Castile, 39–40; O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María, 156–7; and Martínez, Alfonso X, 284–90, accurately attribute the Valladolid miracle to Easter 1278. “[M]ais eno dia fiiz / de Pasqua quis que vivesse” (st. 18cd). The confusion introduced by the CAX concerning the time and place of the cortes in which Sancho was designated heir to the throne is dispelled, in part, by our understanding of the degree to which Alfonso’s disease must have dictated his actions. Both Cantigas 209 and 235 clearly state that the king had suffered major bouts of illness immediately prior to the cortes of Burgos 1276 and Segovia 1278, having been miraculously cured by the Virgin on both occasions. Given the extent and gravity of these episodes, when it was thought he would die, Alfonso must have given serious consideration to the matter of succession, and Sancho, under the

436

89

90 91

92

93

94

95

96

Notes to pages 207–8 circumstances, though he was only eighteen in 1276, was certainly the most logical choice. Procter, Curia and Cortes, 143, underscores the importance of Alfonso’s illness in the designation of Sancho in 1278, citing a declaration by Sancho’s tutor, Juan Gil de Zamora, Liber de preconiis Hispanie, that in this year Sancho “iam incipit coregnare” (146). Ballesteros, Sevilla en el siglo XIII, doc. 211 (ccxxv–ccxxvi); also in DAAX, doc. 439 (461–2), but here Manuel confirms only as “don Manuel, hermano del reyes [sic].” Registres de Nicolas III: Viterbo, 15 July 1278, doc. 262 (98); Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 844. Segovia, 19 de julio 1278: “Sepades que don Çag, el de don Manuel, puso a don Bernalt de Çentellas veynte mill maravedis de la moneda de la guerra en la compusición que fizeron los dij de la villa, con don Sancho, mio fiio, en rrazon de las osuras. Et agora a de rrecabdar ­estos veynte mill maravedis sobredichos por don Bernalt de Çentellas, Apariçio ­Guillem dij de Castiella. Onde uos mando rrecudades con ellos a Apariçio Guillen el sobredicho, assi commo don Çag uos enuia dezir por su carta” (AMB, Sec. Hca., n. 2561) in Colección diplomática del Concejo de Burgos, doc. 59 (143–4); document also mentioned but not published by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 854 and 1115, where he states it is from “AM de Burgos, clasif. 2565.” “Otrosi, mando que todos los christianos de Elda que se iudguen por el fuero et por los alcaldes dElche. Otrosi, mando que los almoxerifes et los sus omens que los iudgue don Çag mio almoxerif o quien el posiere en so logar” in Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 36 (33). “[D]on Çag et don Abrahem nostro alstiquimos que tenemos por bien que sean ende escusados por mucho servicio que fizieron a nostro sennor don Manuel” in Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 32 (136). Armas: “don Çag, mio fisico, que era hermano mayor de don Habraan, ­fisico del rey et mio” (I.136). Libro enfenido: “Et mando vos et consejo vos que en quanto pudieredes aver fisico que sea del linage de Don Çag, que fue fisico de mio padre et mio, que nunca lo dexedes por outro fi ­ sico. Ca yo vos digo verdadera mente que fasta el dia de oy nunca falle tan b ­ uenos fisicos et tan leales, tan bien en la fisica commo en todos sus fechos” (I.155). Toledo, 24 February 1279: “Alfonso X ordena a los cogedores de las décimas de Castilla, Extremadura y ‘allend sierra’ que entregen todo lo que han recogido y lo den a Pedro de Marsella, cirujano de la cámara del rey, pues lo necesita para la armada que estaba preparando contra los moros”; cited in DIAX, doc. 3088 (535). Segovia, 19 julio 1278: “Carta de don Çag, el de don Manuel, por la que pide a los alcaldes y al merino de Burgos que entreguen 20.000 ­maravedis de la moneda de la guerra a Aparicio Guillén del acuerdo de las usuras” in Colleción diplomática del Concejo de Burgos, doc. 62 (145–6).



Notes to pages 208–10

437

97 Gaspar Escolano, Década primera de la historia de Valencia, 163. 98 “El real de don Bernalt de Çentelas: Era de mille et ccc et x annos, en el mes de junio, quando el rey don Alffonsso estaua en Molina Seca ­pidiole merçed, don Bernalt de Çentellas que le mandasse dar vn real en la parte de los moros en que fuere su morada, pues que non auie morada en la villa de Murçia. Et el Rey touolo por bien et mandole dar vn real en que ouiesse x alffabas, et dierongelas en esta guisa: El real que fue de Abolcaçim Alcomayhy, cerca de Acuharich, en el Albocar, en que a xiiii ataffullas, que fazen xi alffabas, con i alffaba que ay de albayat” in ­Repartimiento de Murcia, quinta partición, 203. 99 Manrique, “Treguas y juicio de Dios”, 299–301. Jaime’s verdict is recorded in a royal chancery document two days later, on 18 October 1274, in Miret i Sans, Itinerari de Jaume I, 508–9. 100 Gaspar Escolano, Década primera de la historia de Valencia, 567. 101 Lyon, 1 November 1274 in Registres de Grégoire X, doc. 576, “De usuris” (248–9). 102 See O’Callaghan, The Gibraltar Crusade, 75. 103 Cédula real de Alfonso X a la Ciudad de Burgos, 28 julio 1278, in Archivo General de Burgos, HI-2563; cited and transcribed by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 854–5. 104 The episode was first chronicled by Ballesteros, “Burgos y la rebelión del infante don Sancho,” 129–31, whose conclusions were subsequently rectified by Ruiz, “Una nota sobre,” 391–3. 105 Colmenares, Historia de Segovia, 1.229–31; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 855–6, states 26 September. 106 See DA, doc. 41. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 857, mentions the document ­without, however, transcribing it or indicating its source. 107 Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia: “Tene en Benihaye (Baniaia) .l. ­taffullas, et daluar xx taifullas, que son x alffabas et i ochaua. Tene en Aliada (Aljada) vi taffullas, que son iii alffabas menos ochaua. Tene en Alhuasta (Alguazas) xiiii taffullas, que son viii alffabas. Summa lxix taffullas et daluar xx taffullas, que son xx alffabas” (127). There are five other recipients of land grants with the same name in the Repartimiento de Murcia but none of them rise to the social level or volume of land obtained by García Sánchez de Santa María. They are: García Sánchez, a peón menor in Casillas (30); García Sánchez de Saix, a cauallero menor in Carabixa (49); García Sánchez of Queen Violante’s retinue with land in Benicotó (105); García Sánchez de Terol, a peón mayor in Beniaia (129); and García Sánchez de Cartagena, who received two jugadas in the ­partition of Payares, Cartagena, in January 1269 and whose wife received two ­tafullas in Carabixa (152). 108 Cited by González Jiménez, DIAX, doc. 3067 (531) and González Díez, Colección diplomática del Consejo de Burgos, doc. 75 (157).

438

Notes to pages 210–12

109 In ACA, Cancillería, Reg. 47, fol. 84r. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 870–1, transcribes and comments extensively on the communication without, however, identifying the source. 110 See DA, doc. 42. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 876, states without identifying his source that the document is “fechada en Valencia” in 1278 and that Manuel, Jacobo de las Leyes, and Guillem de Rocafull were in Murcia at the time; González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 332, n. 11, follows Ballesteros in attributing the embassy to January 1278. 111 “Eidem infanti dompno Sancio. Noueritis nos audiuisse et intellexisse plenarie et gratantem ea omnia que Ferrandus Petri deanus Sibilie nobis retulit ex parte vestre, et per ipsum specialiter intelleximus affectionem et uestrum amorem, quem erga uos habetis et econuerso vos scire ­volumus nos erga vos amorem uestrum et afectuosam dilectionem habere. ­Super n ­ egociis uero tractatis, sicut per alias litteras vobis significamus, ­conuenimus habere vistas uobiscum, quod quidem nobis placet, ut uos personaliter videamus et quare speramus tunc tractata negocia finem laudabilem consequi altissimo disponente. Decet igitur vos habere plenam ab illustri Rege patre uestro predicto, potestatem, ut per predictum Deanum et i­ nclitum infantem dompnum Emmanuelem et alios nuncios ab ipso et uobis ad nos missos, intelleximus nempe defensionem huiusmodo et ­potestatis dictorum negotiorum laudabilis consumatio valeat retardari. Dicta injuria vos qua nos uobis teneri asperitas quia hucusque vos vidimus ita nostra et satisfactionem dilectio uobis facere promitimus et emendari. Data vt supra” in ACA, Cancillería, Reg. 47, fol. 84v and partially transcribed in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 876–7, who does not indicate the source and who remarks after “et Ynclitum Ynfantem dompnum Emmanuelem et alios nuncios ab ipso et nobis ad uos missos [sic]” (877) that “[e]l resto de la carta resulta casi ininteligible, pues por algunos v ­ ocablos legibles se colige son fórmulas finales al parecer sin importancia” (877), leaving out precisely that part of the communiqué which is most intriguing. 112 CAX, 70.197–8, provides important details but mistakes the year for 1278; Ibn Abi Zar, Rawd al-Qirtas, 523–638, relates that the campaign began precisely on 27 February 1279. See Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 885–9, and González Jiménez Alfonso X, 332–4. 113 On 9 February, Sancho had written to the merino of Burgos that he was going to rendezvous shortly with Pedro III in Ágreda but the meeting would not take place until the first few weeks of March, since this is the only time when the two of them were in the vicinity of Ágreda: Sancho was there between 24 February and 20 March, and we have documentary evidence that Pedro III was in Tarazona, scarcely twenty kilometres away, during 2–13 March. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 879, believes the meeting took place on 20 March, but Pedro was in Zaragoza by that time.



Notes to pages 212–14

439

114 “Vos scire volumus quod nos quanto celerius potuimos et venimus ­Tirasonam cum karissimo nepote nostro illustri Infante dompno ­ Sancio ... speramus tamen in Domino quod ipsa negotia feliciter disponentur et tunc quicquid inde actum fuerit vobis significare curauimus per ­litteras vel nuntios speciales. Data Tyrasonam vi nonae martii ut supra ­[mcclxxviii]” in ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 84v. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 849, gives a rather inaccurate transcription of the letter, mistaking the date for 1278 when it is, in reality, 1279. This may be why he omits mentioning the ­origin of the document, Tarazona. 115 In ACA, Cancillería, Reg. 47, fol. 85r; published in MHE, doc. 143 (1.326); also published in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 861, without reference to its source. Ballesteros, however, again mistakes the date for 1278 instead of 1279, leading him to affirm that “doña Violante estaba el 18 de marzo de 1278 en Borja” (861). 116 “Et el infante don Sancho, mio fiio, e el infant don Manuel, mio hermano, pidieronme merced que uos lo quitase, e commo quier que esto es mio derecho e cosa sennalada de iusticia e perteneçe a sennorio e non deuia lexar de lo demandar, porque don Sancho e don Manuel me lo rogaron mucho afincadamientre, et por uos fazer bien e merced toue por bien de uos lo quitar en tal manera que los pesos e las medidas e las varas sean todos unos por todo el rregno, segunt lo ordoné yo agora” in González Díez, Colección diplomática del Concejo de Burgos, doc. 82 (165). 117 In Rodríguez López, Real Monasterio de Las Huelgas, doc. 99 (1.480–1). 118 See a letter from Sancho to his uncle, King Edward I, Toledo, 2 May 1279, concerning the discord between his father, Alfonso X, and Philippe III in Rymer, Foedera, 1.4.80, transcribed by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 921. 119 In a letter to the town council of Burgos despatched in Uceda on 10 July 1279, Sancho voices his concern and asks for volunteers to assist him in a campaign against the rebellious nobles in Cuenca: “Yo me uo pora Cuenca por uedar a don Lope et a don Johan, et a los otros Ricos omes que alla son con ellos, el mal e el danno que fazen en la tierra ... onde uos digo por todos aquellos que quisieredes traer armas alli o yo fuere, de qual manera quier que sean, que uos lo gradiré mucho”; in AM de Burgos, HI-2610; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 893. 120 See Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 856–7. 121 In ACA, Reg. 41, fol. 105v; cited in Martínez Ferrando, Documentación Pedro el Grande, doc. 508 (135). The meaning of cena is referenced by Barthe Porcel, “Prontuario medieval,” s.v. “cena” as found in the Fuero de Navarra, lib. iii, and published by Tilander, ed., Vidal mayor. 122 CAX, 71.199; this Zag de la Malea was not the same person as Infante Manuel’s Don Zag. 123 CAX, 72.200–204.

440 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131

132 133 134

135

136

137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144

Notes to pages 215–20 MHE, doc. 159 (2.4–5). MHE, doc. 161 (2.6). CAX, 71.200. MHE, doc. 164 (2.8–11). DAAX, docs. 451 (475–6), 452 (477–8), 453 (478–80), 454 (480–2), 455 (482–3) and 458 (485–7). See DA, doc. 43. See DA, doc. 44; transcribed in MHE, doc. 152 (1.338–9) which gives the date as 1279, an error perpetuated by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 878–9. “Alfonso X aprueba el trueque de Zalamea y Almonaster por Cazalla, hecho entre la Iglesia y el concejo de Sevilla” in DAAX, doc. 462 (489–91): “El infante don Manuel, hermano del Rey e su mayordomo, conf.” CAX, 73.205–6. DIAX, doc. 3162 (548). “Et non fagades ende al, si non mando a Dia Sanchez de Bustamante, adelantado maior en el regno de Murcia por el infante don Manuel, mio hermano, et a otro qualquier que esté ý por él” in Torres Fontes, ­Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 89 (105). “A vos Diag Sanchez de Bustamante, adelantado del reyno de Murçia por el ynfante don Manuel, salud e gracia” in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 87 (104). “A uos, Diag Sanchez de Bustamant, adelantado por el infante don ­Manuel en tierra de Murçia, o a qualquier que estudiere ý por adelantado, salud e gracia” in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 88 (104–5). See DA, doc. 45. CAX, 74.208; see also Martínez, Alfonso X, 289–90, and the diagnosis of Presilla, “The Image of Death,” 434–40. See DA, doc. 46. This document is not included in either Ballesteros, ­Alfonso X, or González Jiménez, DIAX. See Cabezuelo Pliego, Poder público y administración territorial, 1.167–202. See Martínez Ferrando, Documentación Pedro el Grande, doc. 595 (134). See DA, doc. 47. See also López Serrano, “Primer Fuero concedido a ­Yecla por el Infante don Manuel.” See DA, doc. 48. On 9 May 1277, as a signatory to the petition sent to Pope Juan XXII requesting the pontiff to absolve Alfonso X of his oath not to mint any other coins but the “dineros prietos,” he confirms as “Johan Perez, Arcidiano de Murcia”; see full text of document in Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos 2.4 (29 February 1872): 58–60. In Manuel’s last will and testament he is named an executor and referred to as “tesorero de Murcia, mio ­notario.” Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 147,



145 146

147 148 149 150 151 152

153 154 155

156

157

Notes to pages 220–2

441

states that he was married to a daughter of Lorenzo Aben Hud, Christian convert and scion of the reigning Muslim family in Murcia before the Christian conquest and occupation, and that his title indicates he was treasurer of the cathedral of Murcia in the diocese of Cartagena. See Ribera, Centuria primera del real y militar instituto, 415 et passim; see also Ferrer i Mallol, Entre la paz y la guerra, 198. 11 August 1276: “Sepades que yo e sabor de poblar Elche et fago mios partidores a Pero Martines de Jouera et a don Juste et a çer Bona Senna et a Martin Martines” in Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 65 (61–2) and doc. 81 (74–5). Salimbene, Cronica, 205, 349, 438, 471; see also Sardina, “Corrado Lancia.” Crónica, cap. xviii (36–7). Conde Lucanor, 2.439–40. Martínez Ferrando, Documentación Pedro el Grande, docs. 377 (90) and 730 (162). ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 99v. “Regi eidem quod credat Dalmacio de Villa Rasa supra eis quis sibi ex parte etc. Data Turolium v idus novembri” [9 November] ... Et alia ad Infantem Emanuelem supra eodem. Data vt supra.” See DA, doc. 49. CAX, 74.211. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, mistakenly claims that William’s first wife was “Isabel de Inglaterra o de Cornwall, hija del conde Ricardo” (486, 934) when she was, according to the reliable account of Benvenuto de Sancto Giorgio, Historia Montisferrati, the daughter of Richard de Clare, 5th Earl of Hertford and 6th Earl of Gloucester, son of Gilbert de Clare, 4th Earl of Hertford and 5th Earl of Gloucester, and his wife Isabel Marshall (389–90). Richard was first married in 1232 to Margaret de Burgh, who died without issue in 1237. Richard subsequently wed Maud de Lacey in 1238 and with her had seven children of whom Isabel was the first, named after her grandmother, Isabel Marshall. She was married to ­William VII in 1258 and died in 1270. Molinier, “Trahison du vicomte de Narbonne,” 10.411, reports that ­Alfonso X “désireux de s’assurer la bienveillance de l’un des principaux feudataires de la monarchie capétienne dans le sud de la France, proposa de marier Marguerite, soeur d’Aymeri et d’Amauri, à son fils puîné, ­l ’infant don Pedro; l’affaire s’arrangea, grâce aux bons offices de l’évéque de Béziers, Pons de Saint-Just.” “Juuabimus vos, modo predicto, vos predictos Marchionis Monteferrati et Salucie ab obtiendam et habendam terras quas domus Sabaudie habet et ­tenens in Lombardia” in ACA, Reg. 47, fols. 99r–v; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 930–1, gives a partial transcription of the document without citing his source.

442

Notes to pages 223–5

158 “Unde cum nos simus maximis negotiis oppressi, tum quia Rex ­Castellae gerit erga nos contrariam voluntatem, qui nobis potentior est, sicut scitis, ... vobis de familia aliqua militum sucurrere non posumus in praesenti, ... prout super praedictis certificari poteritis per nobilem Marchionem Montisferrati, qui diu stetit cum Rege Castellae, et cito ad ipsas partes accedet.... si tamen pax inter dictum Regem Castellae et nos firmetur, debemus tradere dicto Marchioni ratione comitatus Sobaudiae ­familiam militum et ballisteriorum” in ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 101r. Though the ­document is transcribed in MHE, doc. 169 (2:17–18) and discussed by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 913–14, both the MHE and Ballesteros give the date as 1280 instead of 1281. 159 See DA, doc. 50. 160 His surname is found variously as Podio/Poyo/Puch/Pueyo/Despuig; see Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, s.v. “Poyo,” 463–4. 161 Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 13, 18, 214–15, 217–18, 223; see also Torres Fontes, Documentos para la historia medieval de Ceutí, 29–30, et passim. 162 “De mj ynffante don Manuel, fijo del Rrey don Ferrando, al Conçeio [e] a los alcaldes de Burgos, salut assi commo a omnes buenos que quiero bien [e] en qui ffio e para qui querria buena uentura. Sepades que donna Hurraca e Marina Garçia, ffijas de donna Toda, mi ama, me dixieron que les demandades pecho por raçon de vnas casas que an en uuestro logar e que nunqua les demandárades pecho ffata agora, porque uos ruego quanto puedo que uos por [el] mi amor sennalada mjente que las querades quitar de pecho, e si alguna cosa [l]es an peyndrado o tomado por esta raçón que ge lo mandedes luego dar [e] facer medes en ello plaçer e serujçio, e cosa que uos gradiré mucho. Et [si] quier deuedes lo ffaçer por dos cosas, la una porque son ellas en la [o]rden a seruiçio de Dios, e la otra por el debdo que an conmigo. Dada en Otardajos, .v. dias de Março. Era de mill .ccc. diez nueue Años. Yo Rodrig Yuánnez la fiz escriuir por mandado de don Manuel” in González Díez, Colección diplomática del Consejo de Burgos, doc. 109 (196–7). 163 See Serrano, “El mayordomo mayor de Doña Berenguela,” 123; also Álvarez Borge, “Los dominios,” 649, 667. 164 Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 131, 186–7, 190–2, 221, 223, and 226. 165 Álvarez Borge, “Los dominios,” 658–9, 667. 166 Álvarez Borge, “Los dominios,” 650–1, 167 See Lafont Mateo, Pampliega, Torrespadierne y Santiuste, 61–2. 168 See DA, doc. 51. 169 “[C]on un protagonismo todopoderoso del infante don Manuel, esa figura opaca pero del que se advierte su presencia en todas partes e indicios de intervenciones malquerientes hacia su hermano e influencia en su s­ obrino” in Torres Fontes, “Historicidad de la Cantiga CCCLXXXII,” 354.



Notes to pages 226–8

443

170 For a detailed analysis of the accords, see Ayala Martínez, “Paces castellanoaragonesas de Campillo-Ágreda.” 171 ANA, Reg. 47, fol. 104r, published in MHE, doc. 182 (2.32–5). 172 Campillo, 27 March 1281: “Nouerint vniuersi quod nos Infans Hemanuel felicis recordationis domini Regis Ferrandi filius, promittimus uobis dompno Petro Dei gratia illustri Regi Aragonum et iuramos sollempni stipulacione reddere uobis uel cui volueritis infra tres septimanas post instans festum Resurrectionis Domini, Castrum et Villam de Ayora et Castrum et Villam de Palaciolos cum omnibus terminis et pertinentiis et juribus dictorum castrorum et locorum. Concedemus jnsuper nos Castra et loca predicta tendere a uobis medio tempore in cernanda et ea constituimus jnterim uestro nomine possidere. Et ad maiorem securitatem facimus inde uobis omagium et juramus ita attendere et complere. Datum est hodie in Campillo jnter Ágredam et Tirasonam .vi. kalendas aprilis anno Domini m.cc.lxxx.j. Era m.ccc.xix” in ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 107r. 173 Ágreda, 27 March 1281: “Et porque estas cosas sean mas firmes et ­ualederas, fago uos pleyto et omenage et juro sobre los santos euangelios de tener et de guardar todas estas cosas assi como son escriptas en esta carta” in ACA, Reg. 47, fols. 106r–107r. 174 See Ayala Martínez, “Paces castellano-aragonesas de Campillo-Ágreda,” 158, who alludes to these “acuerdos velados,” stating that Alfonso was only present during the first day of the negotiations. 175 “Infanti Dompno Hemanueli. Noveritis quod mittimus ad vos Ramon de Palatio [Palau] de domo nostra quod recipiendis et imperandis castris et locis Vallis Dayora qua nobis estis redditurus, rogantes quia castra nostra tradetis uel tradi faciatis Ramon de Palatio loco nostro. Data Tarasona Kalendas aprilis anno vt supra [lxxx primero]. P. de Sancto Clemente” in ACA, Reg. 49, fol. 62v. 176 Cingolani, Diplomatari de Pere el Gran, doc. 137 (275). 177 In ACA, Reg. 48, fol. 23v, cited by Romano, Judiós al servicio de Pedro el Grande, 128, n. 916. 178 Cingolani, Diplomatari de Pere el Gran, doc. 314 (550). 179 “[L]a villa et el castiello de Hauaniella que les nos tomamos pora dar a don Remond, fijo de don Guilen de Rocaffuel” in AHN Uclés, caj. 90, n. 2, cited by Torres Fontes, Señorío de Abanilla, 30, n. 2. 180 Toledo, 24 April, in Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 151 (158–60). 181 The miracle of Cantiga 382 has been extensively investigated by H ­ ernández Serna, “La Cantiga CCCLXXXII de Alfonso el Sabio”; Kinkade, “Don Juan Manuel’s Father”; and Torres Fontes, “Historicidad de la Cantiga CCCLXXXII.” 182 Zurita, Anales, 2.72.374.

444 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192

193 194 195 196

197

198 199 200 201 202

203 204 205 206 207

Notes to pages 228–31 Baumel, Histoire, 2.81. Miret i Sans, Itinerari, 146. Itinerari, 219–20. Itinerari, 355. Itinerari, 369; 381–2. Itinerari, 338. Itinerari, 383. Huici Miranda and Cabanes Pecourt, Documentos de Jaime I, 5.205. ACA, Reg. 15, fol. 21, in Itinerari, 389. Barcelona, 3 January 1279, in ACA, Cancillería, Reg. 47, fol. 84v, partially transcribed in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 876, who mistakenly claims that the document was “fechada en Valencia,” but without identifying his source. Torres Fontes, “Historicidad de la Cantiga CCCLXXXII,” 358–60. Baumel, Histoire, 2.125. Gallofre Guinovart, Documentos, 52, 121, 259. AHN, Uclés, caj. 90, número 2, cited by Fray Pascual Salmerón, La antigua Carteia, 32–5, in Torres Fontes, Señorío de Abanilla, 30, n. 2; also cited by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, doc. 1262 (1121), who does not make the connection between this charter and Cantiga 382; O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María, gives the date as “4 April” and believes Cantiga 382 should be dated “after April and perhaps after the settlement charter of December 1281” (227); but it is clear from the charter that the exchange agreement had been reached by both parties prior to 24 April 1281. Torres Fontes, Señorío de Abanilla, writes that “[l]a Orden de Santiago, conociendo el compromiso de don Alfonso, iba a lograr una permuta muy ventajosa e interesada, pues desde Segura de la Sierra había ido extendiendo su dominio a lo largo del valle fluvial del Segura, y con el cambio de Abanilla por Cieza completaba su señorío” (30). DIAX,Seville, 6 October 1280: doc. 3206 (556). DIAX, Seville, 20 August 1281: doc. 3280 (569). See Torres Fontes, “El adelantamiento mayor del reino de Murcia,” 227–35. Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 5 (225). Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, 54–5, 88, 464–8. See also Cascales, ­Discursos históricos de Murcia, 101, and Torres Fontes, Señorío de Abanilla, 38–48. Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 152 (160–2). ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 103v, also in MHE, doc. 182 (2.33–7). See Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, 426–7, and Gaibrois de ­Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 1.12, n.2. Córdoba, 14 mayo 1281, in DAAX, doc. 481 (509–11). Torres Fontes, Fueros y privilegios de Alfonso X, CODOM 3, doc. 153 (162–3): “Et mando a Diag Sanchez de Bustamente o a qualquier que



208 209 210

211 212

213 214 215 216

217 218 219 220 221

222

Notes to pages 231–6

445

fuese adelantado por el infante don Manuel, mio hermano, en el reyno de Murçia, que lo fagan assi cumplir como yo mando, e non fagan ende al” (163). CAX, 75:214–15; Anales toledanos III, 67a M.CC.LXXXI (174). CAX, 75.214; see Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 941–5. The epigraph of the cantiga speaks of a “grand enfermedade de que lle ynchavan as pernas tan muito que lle non podiam caber enas calças.” Both O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María, 188–91, and Martínez, Alfonso X, 293–5, date the incident to June 1281. DAAX, doc. 482 (511–13). “[A]lia Infanti dompno Sancho quod credat Andree de Prochida dilecto scutifero nostro super hiis que sibi duxerit et cetera. Data ut supra.... ­Similiter de credentia Infanti dompno Manueli quod credat et cetera. Data ut supra” in ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 109r; see also Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 944, who refers to the letter as transcribed in MHE, doc. 191 (2.49–50). See DA, doc. 52. Ar. s∙ āh∙ib al-madīna, or local magistrate functioning as chief of police; see n. 207, chap. 4. The text has hal Gabbes, a scribal error for gabela, “tribute,” derived from Ar. qabala with the same meaning. Almotacén, which the DRAE states is derived from Hispanoarabic ­almuh∙tasáb, and this from classical Ar. muh∙ŏtasib, a public employee charged with maintaining the integrity of weights and measures. T ­ orres Fontes, “Las ordenaciones al almotacén murciano,” declares that ­Alfonso X instituted the office of almotacén in Murcia in 1266 and that the p ­ rincipal responsibilities of the office “se relacionan directamente con tres aspectos fundamentales de la vida urbana: sanidad y limpieza, abastecimiento y venta, y control de pesos y medidas, esto es, todo cuanto compete a una función que en principio se atribuye de inspección” (83). See DA, doc. 53. CAX, 75: 216. CAX, 75: 217–20. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 374; Procter, Alfonso X of Castile, 35; Martínez, ­Alfonso X, 233–97 et passim. Pero López de Ayala remarks in his Libro de la caça de las aves that falcons “comjençan a mudar la prjma semana de junjo. E vnos mas tenprano & otros mas tarde segun acaesçe” in Fradejas Rueda, ed., chap. 39 (fol. 68r). In the Libro de la caza, 1.560–3, Juan Manuel describes in detail how f­ alcons are to be molted: “commo deuen fazer por que los falcones muden bien et metan buena pennola.” In the same work the author writes how his cousin Infante Juan related that Infante Manuel once had a saker falcon when he was in Murcia with King Alfonso, describing how the infante

446

223

224 225

226

227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238

Notes to pages 236–42 and his son, Alfonso, found themselves in danger chasing the falcon over irrigation ditches in the fertile plains of the region. He later reports that Infante Juan declared Don Manuel to be the greatest falconer and the one who had the greatest number of birds of prey: “don Manuel era el mayor caçador et que mas aues tenya” (1.559). See Glick, “Agriculture and Nutrition: Christian Spain,” in Dictionary of the Middle Ages, 1.83–4, and generally, his Irrigation and Society in Medieval Valencia (Cambridge, 1970). Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 299. O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María, accurately dates both Cantigas 366 and 376 to “the end of 1281 or the very beginning of 1282.” “Del ueynteno grado del signo de aries es la piedra aque dizen yzf. & es aquella aque nos llamamos iaspio. Esta piedra es de su natura ­caliente & seca. Et es otrossi de muchas guisas pero las meiores son cinco.” ­Citations from the Lapidario are taken from the Electronic Texts edition. See Kinkade, “Alfonso X, Cantiga 235,” 286, n. 3. See DA, doc. 54. See DA, doc. 55. Schadek, “Tunis oder Sizilien?,” 340. Salazar y Castro, Casa de Haro, 1–9. Flórez de Ocariz, Libro Segundo, 92. Garibay, Compendio historial, 3.229. Garibay, Compendio historial, 3.230. ACA, Reg. 46, fol. 110v. Seville, 16 December 1281, in DAAX, doc. 487 (516–19): “El infante don Manuel, hermano del rey e su mayordomo, conf.” See O’Callaghan, Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María, chap. 9, “The Cycle of El Puerto de Santa María,” 172–91. See González Jiménez, Alfonso X, 349, n. 69. 8. The Rebellion of 1282–84

1 “De simili manera Infanti dompno Sancho quod assistat dicto nuncio auxilio et fauore ... Similiter Ynfanti dompno Emanueli” in ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 115r; published in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 959–60, with numerous inaccuracies. 2 AM de Miranda de Ebro, Sign. C, leg. II-24, in Cantera Burgos, “Miranda en tiempos de Alfonso X,” 144; cited by González Jiménez, DIAX, doc. 3574 (629). 3 Malalana Ureña, Escalona medieval, maintains that Manuel “se instaló rapidamente en su nueva ciudad” (38), and I am inclined to agree with him.



Notes to pages 242–5

447

4 AM de Toledo, c. 10, leg. 3, n. 8, in Izquierdo Benito, Privilegios, 35; cited by González Jiménez, DIAX, doc. 3575 (629). 5 MHE, doc. 194 (2.53). 6 In AM de Vitoria, Sección 8a, leg. 6a; cited in DIAX, doc. 3587 (631). 7 AHN, Docs. de Santiago, Badajoz, Xerez, cax. 372, núm. 3, in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 962, doc. 1307 (1123). 8 DIAX, doc. 3600 (633); CAX, 76.224. 9 CAX, 76.223. 10 Payment made to the Crown in exchange for a royal pledge not to debase the currency. 11 Tax payable on St. Martin’s Day. 12 “Por quanto el rey don Alfonso mato a don Fadrique su hermano e a don Ximon Ruyz señor de los Cameros e otros muchos fidalgos sin derecho commo no deuia, pierda la justiçia. E por que deseredo los fijodalgos de Castilla e los de Leon e los çibdadanos e los conçejos, non lo resçiban en las villas nin en las fortalezas e sea deseredado dellos. E por que desaforo los fidalgos, que non cumplan sus cartas nin le respondan con los fueros. E por que despecho la tierra e fizo malas monedas, non le den pechos nin seruiçios nin monedas foreras nin las martiniegas nin otros derechos ningunos de la tierra avnque los demande” in Catalán Menéndez ­Pidal, ­“Alfonso X historiador,” 12; also reproduced in Lindley Cintra, ed., Crónica Geral de Espanha de 1344, 4.512. 13 “Protestamus quod ... nobis aliqui iniungatur per prefatum Donnum ­Sanctium et germanos suos ac Donnum Enmanuelem” (112). The full text, which we follow here, is published by Rodríguez Gil, “Sentencia de deposición,” 110–13, with corrections to the text previously published in MHE, doc. 198 (2.59–63), which incorrectly dates the document 21 April 1281. 14 “Donnus Santius cum aliquibus baronibus militibus et civibus ... curia ad hoc tunc minime convocata ... ianuis clausis” in Rodríguez Gil, “Sentencia de deposición,” 111. 15 “[N]ec inter fuimus publicationi dicte sententie que post modum in publico dicitur esse facta” in Rodríguez Gil, “Sentencia de deposición,” 111. 16 CAX, 76.224. 17 In this context, see Pretel Marín and Rodríguez Llopis, Señorío de Villena, 34, who add: “En fecha desconocida recibió también la posesión de Isso y Hellín, lugares mudéjares muy estratégicos para el control de la ruta entre Castilla y el reino de Murcia ... en esta ocasióno tal vez con anterioridad, obtuvo don Manuel Chinosa.” 18 See “Conciertos y capitulaciones de la Infanta Doña Constanza de Aragón con D. Juan, hijo del Infante D. Manuel” in Benavides, ed., ­Memorias de ­Fernando IV, doc. 359 (2.526–34); cited by Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, 331.

448

Notes to pages 245–9

19 Valladolid, 30 April 1282, in Arch. Hist. Prov. Albacete, Libro de copia de privilegios de Chinchilla, MUN. Leg. 11, fol. 29, in Pretel Marín, Conquista, doc. 29 (284–5). 20 “Ca yo nasçi en Escalona, martes çinco dias de mayo, era de mill et CCC et XX annos,” (1.133–4). In Rome on the sixth of May in the year 95, John the Apostle, nearly one hundred years old at the time, was condemned to death by the Emperor Domitian, who decreed that he be cast into a cauldron of boiling oil next to the Latin Gate. Spared by a miracle, he emerged from the oil unscathed, and the day, in commemoration of the event, is known as the feast of St. John Before the Latin Gate. 21 González Díez, Colección diplomática del Consejo de Burgos, doc. 118 (205–6); also in MHE, doc. 209 (2.78–80); see also Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 975. 22 Buitrago, 27 May 1282: “yo Díaz Sánches de Bustamant, adelantado por el infante don Manuel en el regno de Murçia, vi carta del infante don Sancho, fijo mayor et heredero del muy noble rey don Alfonso, en que me mandava que entregase a vos, el conçeio de Orihuela, de todos ­vuestros términos bien et complidamiente, segund los privilegios et las cartas del rey que tenedes dicen” in Cingolani, Diplomatari de Pere el Gran, doc. 219 (396–8). 23 CAX, 76.224–5. 24 See Marcos Pous, “Los dos matrimonios de Sancho IV de Castilla.” 25 See Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 990–1. 26 CAX, 77. 237–8. 27 González Díez, Colección diplomática del Consejo de Burgos, doc. 121 (208–9). 28 MHE, doc. 211 (2.81–2). 29 CAX, 76.225, and González Jiménez and Carmona Ruiz, Diplomas del ­Infante Don Sancho, doc. 3700 (651). 30 Original Latin text in Zurita, Indices, 171–4. The Spanish translation by Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 409–13, and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 992–8, is to be preferred to that of Canellas, Indices de las gestas de los reyes de Aragón, 1.262–6, reproduced in DAAX, doc. 503bis (532–5); see Hernández, Alfonso X in Andalucía, 296. 31 Documentación de la Catedral de Segovia, doc. 205 (328–30). 32 AHN, Ord. Militares: Santiago, Encomienda de Paracuellos, carp. 260, n. 10, in Asenjo González, “Fiscalidad regia,” 1.83–4. Ballesteros, ­Alfonso X, 985, cites the document but without providing its source. 33 “[M]andamos ge lo tomar porque se fue a don Sancho” in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 90 (106). 34 MHE, doc. 212 (2.83–5). 35 Ferrer i Mallol, Entre la paz y la guerra, 180. 36 Ibn Abi Zar, Rawd al-Qirtas, 2.635–7; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 982, 987.



Notes to pages 249–52 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

44

45 46 47 48

49 50 51

52 53 54

449

See DA, doc. 56. See DA, doc. 57. CAX, 76.225–7. CAX, 76.229. Ibn Abi Zar, Rawd al-Qirtas, 637; CAX, 76.229; Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 992. Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 409–13, and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 992–8. The date 8 November 1283 given in the transcription of the document published in MHE, doc. 228 (2.110–22), has led many historians astray. O’Callaghan, Learned King, 265, n. 50, accurately identifies the date 1282 in the original Latin text of the will published by Daumet, “Les ­testaments d’Alphonse X,” 75–87. The text of MHE, doc. 228 (2.115), is distorted, especially in the ­passage referring to Infante Manuel. I have corrected it by comparing it to the first publication of the original Castilian text in Chronica del muy ­esclarecido principe y rey don Alonso, fol. 53v, and a contemporary Latin ­translation of the original text made by the Castilian royal ­chancery and sent to Philippe III of France; see Daumet, “Les testaments ­d’Alphonse X,” 79–80. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 1008–9. González Jiménez and Carmona Ruiz, Diplomas del Infante Don Sancho, doc. 3721 (655). CAX, 76.229 and 230, n. 356. Exemplo xxxiii, “De lo que contesçio a vn falcon sacre del infante Don Manuel con vna aguila et con vna garça: El infante don Manuel andaua vn dia a caça cerca de Escalona, et lanço vn falcon sacre a vna garça, et montando el falcon con la garça, vino al falcon vna águila. El falcon, con miedo del águila, dexo la garça et començo a foyr; et el águila desque vio que non podía tomar el falcon, fuesse. Et desque el falcon vio yda el águila, torno a la garça et començo a andar muy bien con ella por la matar. Et andando el falcon con la garça torno otra vez el águila al falcon, et el falcon començo a foyr commo el otra vez” (2.276). For the most recent study see Luongo, “Didáctica, alegoría política y autobiografía.” Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 79 (73–4); ­Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 1009–11. See Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia, 107, and Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 31 (43–9) and doc. 94 (105); ­Libro de la caza, 2.579. Torres Fontes, Documentos de Alfonso X, CODOM 1, doc. 95 (109–10). CAX, 77.230. Palencia, 22 May 1283: “por rruegos del infante don Manuel, mi tío” in Torres Fontes, Documentos de Sancho IV, CODOM 4, doc. 8 (6). The text of

450

55 56 57

58 59 60

61 62 63 64

65 66

67 68

Notes to pages 252–5 Infante Manuel’s original charter is published in Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 67 (63–4). González Jiménez and Carmona Ruiz, Diplomas del Infante Don Sancho, docs. 3728–9 (656), 3731–2 (656–7), 3733–5 (657). DAAX, doc. 508 (538–9). “E el infante don Sancho rogó al infante don Manuel su tio que fuese con ellos e los pusiese en saluo fasta en Portugal. Et fízolo así. Et desque los ovo puestos, ellos fuéronse por Portugal su camino fasta Seuilla al rey don Alfonso” in CAX, 77.231. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 1017–18 and González Díez, Colección diplomática del Consejo de Burgos, doc. 128 (214–15). Rawd al-Qirtas, 2.638–9. See DA, doc. 58. An eighteenth-century copy of this document was transcribed by Fr. Vicente Velázquez de Figueroa, ed., Libro de Becero del ­Convento Real de S. Juan y S. Pablo , fol. 31. Zurita, Anales, 4.32.181–2. MHE, doc. 222 (2.99–100); Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 1028–9. Millán Abad, Historia de Coyanza, 1.237; Gavilanes Laso, “Portugal y ­Valencia de Don Juan,” 52. Berenguela was not, as is usually accepted, the abadesa or abbess of the convent, a position held at that time by Doña María Gutiérrez (1273–87), but rather “señora y mayora,” a noble lady placed by the kings of Castile-León in the convent to defend it and honour it as described by Escrivá Balaguer, Abadesa: “Era, pues, Señora y Mayora de las Huelgas una Infanta puesta en el monasterio por los Reyes, para defenderle y para más honrarle” (235–7). This distinction is made abundantly clear by Alfonso X in a privilege given to the nuns of Las Huelgas in Burgos on 24 February 1255: “Et esto por onra de la Inffante Donna Berenguela, mi hermana, que es Sennora et mayor del Monesterio” in Arch. Monasterio de Las Huelgas, legajo 10, núm 330, cited by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 101, and doc. 192 (1069); DIAX, doc. 566 (94), gives the date 22 January 1255. In ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 120v; published in MHE, doc. 223 (2.101) and ­Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 1030. Zurita, Anales, 4.34.182–3. Escrivá Balaguer, Abadesa, chap. 2, “El Señorío civil de la Abadesa,” 41–60, provides ample evidence of the very real power held by the abbess and infanta in Burgos and the surrounding region. AHA, Reg. 47, fol. 120v, transcribed by Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 1031. “Sabedes que quando agora fueron ayuntados las hermandades en Toro, ovimos acordo con el infant don Manuel mio tio, e con los otros rricos homes que y eran conmigo e con los otros homes bonos de las hermandades que y eran tan bien de Castilla como de Leon como de Estremadura, que los judios de mio señorio oviessen entregado e que les



Notes to pages 255–6

69 70

71 72

73

74

451

entregassen suas debdas que se los non oviessen non podrian entregar los mios pechos nin podrian acabar nenguna cosa de lo suyo ... dada en Toro XV dias de julio, Era de mill e tresçientos XXI anos” in Lera Maíllo, Catálogo de documentos de la Catedral de Zamora, doc. 961 (308); cited by González Jiménez, DIAX, doc. 3756 (661), who says “Catálogo ... Zamora, doc. 958.” CAX, 77.231. “Habet enim communis fame relatio, quod dilecti filii nobiles viri ­Sanctius, aliique carissimi in Christo filii nostri A. regis Castelle ac ­Legionis illustris nati, Emanuel germanus, necnon subditi regis ejusdem in eum subito insurgentes et aspirantes ad totalem exheredationem ­ipsius” in Registres de Martin IV, doc. 479 (219–20). DAAX, doc. 515 (544–6). Bernardo de Bellvis, or Bernat de Bellvís, was a trusted Catlán retainer of Pedro III and is mentioned frequently by Gaspar Escolano, Historia de la Ciudad y Reyno de Valencia, who refers to this very same letter from Pedro to Infante Manuel, characterizing Bernardo as “uno de los mas ­esclarecidos caualleros en paz y guerra que hubo en aquella edad” (2.1272–4). “Dilecto suo Sancio Eneco tenenti locum nobilis viri infantis dompni Emanueli. Salutem et dilectionem. Noveritis quod nos mittimus ad partes Regni Valentie dilectum militem nostrum Bernardum de ­Pulcrouiso tenente locum ultra flumen Xucheris nobilis Roderici E ­ ximeni de Luna, procuratoris nostri in dicto Regno et mandavimus stricte quod ­uobis et aliis de terra dicti dompni infantis Emanueli et infantis dompni Sanchis, ­karissimo nepotis nostri, impendant consilium, auxilium et juvamen ­super negotiis ipsarum terrarum, quicumque a nobis uel quis fuerit, requisitus fuerit immo uos rogamus attente adiuvare supra ­negotiis terre nostre intercedatis dicto Bernardo de Pulcrouiso consilium, ­auxilium, ­juvamen ad eo faciatis requisimus et regratiabimus uobis. Data ­Caesaraugusta iiii nonae octubri anno ut supra [1283],” in ACA, Reg. 46, fol. 110v. Talavera, 16 October 1283: “Fago uos a saber que agora, quando yo llegué a Burgos, que fueron y conmigo el Inffante don Manuel, et don Lope, et don Diego, et don Diego Lopez de Salzedo, et don Johan Ferrandez de Limia, et don Pero Alvarez, et prelados et Ynffançones et caualleros, et otros muchos omnes buenos dellos Regnos, et fablaron en camino ­catassemos carrera de amor et de avenencia entre el Rey mio padre et mi, et todollos otros dela tierra. Et yo touelo por bien. Et sobresto acordamos que todollos otros dela tierra, que ffuessen ayuntantados en Palencia, el dia de todos ssantos, primero que uiene, para catar en qual guisa sea el Rey guardado el ssu derecho, et a mi el mio” in Arch. Cat. de León,

452

75

76 77 78 79 80 81 82

83 84

85

86 87 88 89

90 91 92 93

94

Notes to pages 256–60 n. 1182. The text transcribed here is published in Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 1039–40, doc. 1436 (1130). See also Ruiz Asencio and Martín Fuertes, eds., Colección documental de la catedral de León, doc. 2429, Reg. Documental, 268; cited by González Jiménez, DIAX, doc. 3766 (662–3). Anales toledanos III: “Era de MCCCXXI annos. Anno Domini M ­ CCLXXXIII, XIIII Kalendas novenbris, obiit domnus Petrus, filius nobilissimi regis Alfonsi et frater Domini Regis” (175). CAX, 77.237. González Jiménez, Diplomas de Don Sancho, doc. 3769 (663). CAX, 77.237–8. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 606. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia en el s. XIII, 200. Armas, 1.136. “[D]on Johan, fil de don Enmanuel, et fe homenatge por ell Gomez ­Ferrandez de Horosco” in MHE, doc. 2 (3.426–60 at 455). See also ­Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 2.139–45. Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, 24 July 1296, doc. 6 (227) and 22 November 1297, doc. 12 (237). “Estando el rey sobre la villa, teniéndola en muy gran estrecho, vinieron al real de parte de don Joan hijo del infante don Manuel dos caballeros de su casa que se llamaban Gómez Fernández y Alfonso García, para tomar en su nombre, que era muy mozo, algún asiento y concordia con el rey por el deudo que con él tenía” (Zurita, Anales, 5.21.501). “Lo mismo juraron don Joan Manuel y Joan Sánchez de Ayala, Gomez Fernández de Horozco, Sancho Ximénez de Lanclares que eran vasallos de don Joan” (Zurita, Anales, 5.59.643). Casa de Haro, 15.90–1. Benavides, Memorias de Fernando IV, 1.117. Salazar y Castro, Reparos históricos, 147, 165. “Et el rey don Alfonso tomó a la reyna donna Beatriz de Portugal, su fija, e el infante don Sancho tomó a la infanta donna María su mujer, et estas amas, encubiertamente, començaron la abenençia entre el rey don Alfonso et el infante don Sancho por mandaderos que se enbiauan vna a otra, con voluntat de cada vno de los sennores” (77.239). See DA, doc. 59. See DA, doc. 20. Torres Fontes, “Testamento del infante don Manuel.” See DA, doc. 60. I have not, however, rendered the abbreviation mr. as morabetinos as does Cabanes Catalá throughout, preferring instead, with Torres Fontes, the more common maravedís utilized in most contemporary documents. Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de la huerta y campo de Murcia, 218–19.



Notes to pages 260–2

453

95 Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, doc. 199 (3.cxxi). 96 “Venta de una casa derruida, en la colación de Santa Trinidad, en Toledo, lindante con la capilla de San Juan del Arzobispo, con otra casa de él, con otra de la Catedral y con la calle que va a la iglesia de Santa ­Trinidad; otorgada por don Alfonso Martínez, hijo de don Martín Fernández ­Pantoja, que la heredó de sus padres, a favor del Arzobispo de Toledo don Gonzalbo, hijo del aguacil don Pedro Juanes, por precio de 400 ­mizcales de los sueldos corrientes” in González Palencia, Los mozárabes de Toledo, 2.716.331. He and his son and his son’s wife are also mentioned in two other documents from this collection: December 1289, 3.873.151 and End of 13th Century, 3.896.163. 97 In Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, doc. 421 (3.cclxxxiii–cclxxxiv). 98 Zurita, Anales: “Y vuelto para Barcelona casi en fin de abril se tornó a tratar con el rey de Castilla que se asentase entre ellos la tregua conforme a lo que fue mandado y concluido por los legados en Tarascón. Y esto le envió a requerir el rey con un caballero castellano llamado Martín ­Alvarez de Herrera” (4.121.415). See also Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 2.101, n. 1. 99 González, Fernando III, 1.155. 100 Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Orihuela, lxxviii. The tahúlla (Ar. tahwila, “campo, pieza de tierra”), an agrarian measure utililized in Murcia, ­Granada, and Almería, is equivalent to 1,118 square metres. 101 “[V]n cauallero que me crio, que era mucho ançiano et se criara con mio padre et era su hermano de leche” (1.122). 102 Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, Apéndice Documental, 1.cxlvii. 103 Burgos, 13 de agosto de 1294: “Real carta a Pedro Sánchez de la Cámara,” in Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, doc. 563 (3.ccclxxxii–ccclxxxiii). 104 Moret, Annales de Navarra, 3.262; cited by Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, 2.387. 105 Burgos, 13 August 1294: “Real carta a Pedro Sánchez de la Cámara” in Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, doc. 563 (3.ccclxxxii–ccclxxxiii). 106 “[E]l Rey don Ferrando dio a Gomez Ferrandez ayo de Don Johan para en su vida los derechos que ha en las Baraxas que eran de Don Johan ­Breton porque es fuera de la tierra” in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 12 (237), and dated Valencia, 22 November 1297; the letter is a ­document sent to Juan Manuel by Jaime II, who reiterates the complaints posted earlier by Juan Manuel. 107 Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 12 (237). 108 31 December 1299: “Tránsito por Aragón de la infanta Doña Isabel de ­Mallorca al ir a reunirse con su esposo” in Giménez Soler, Don Juan ­Manuel, doc. 21 (242–3). 109 Also known as the livre tournois, the original name for the French franc.

454

Notes to pages 262–7

110 Her extensive geneology may be found in Mattoso, ed., Livro de Linhagens do Conde D. Pedro, 1.91315–18; 9C15–17; 1.10C11–14; 1.10E12; 1.10F13–14. 111 Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel: Tarragona, 28 October 1306, doc. 158 (341); Escalona, 14 November 1306, doc. 159 (341); Coimbra, 4 December 1306, doc. 161 (342–3). 112 Money coined by Alfonso X in 1265 following the first war of Granada; see Francisco Olmos, “La moneda de la Castilla Bajo Medieval,” 290–1. 113 Tax due on St. Martin’s Day. 114 Measure of grain equal to four bushels or 222 litres. 115 Rivera Garretas, Encomienda, doc.213 (421). 116 Francisco Olmos, “La moneda en la Castilla bajomedieval,” 290–1. 117 Morales, Noticias históricas del Archivo de Uclés, 2.32. 118 Rades y Andrada, Chronica de las tres órdenes, 33r. 119 Quadrado and Fuente, España: Sus monumentos y artes, 2.348. 120 Arco y Garay, Sepulcros de la Casa Real de Castilla, 225–6. 121 Gómez Moreno, El panteón real de las Huelgas de Burgos, 32. The error appears to have been introduced by Manrique, Cisterciencium seu verius, t. 3, Appendix, 7–8, and propagated by Calvo, Apuntes históricos, 88, and Agapito y Revilla, Real Monasterio de las Huelgas de Burgos, who states, “D. Manuel, hijo de Sancho IV el Bravo, negado por algunos fuera de este rey, pero, dice el señor Calvo, citando a Manrique: ‘lo cierto es que en su sepulcro se lee esta inscripción: En esta sepultura está enterrado el señor Infante D. Manuel, hijo del señor rey don Sancho’” (53). 122 Torres Fontes, Documentos del siglo XIII, CODOM 2, doc. 40 (37). 123 Mondéjar, Memorias históricas, 513. 124 Argote de Molina, Succession y linage de don Iuan Manuel, fols. 8r–53v. 125 Torres Fontes, “La descendencia del Infante Don Manuel.” 126 Rodríguez López, Real Monasterio de las Huelgas, 1.209, n.2. 127 González Hurtebise, Libros de tesoreria, June, 1303, t. 1.609, cited in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, 281–2. 128 Chronicon, 554. 129 Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, 95; letter published in Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, doc. 363 (492–3). Sancho’s appointment as ­alcaide del alcaçar de Murcia was confirmed by the Council of Murcia on 16 ­November 1319, in AM de Murcia, Pergaminos, no. 94, online at www. regmurcia.com. 130 Cascales, Discursos históricos de Murcia, 287. 131 See Ferrer i Mallol, Entre la paz y la guerra, 238. 132 Ferrer i Mallol, Entre la paz y la guerra, 169, 237, 627. 133 See Torres Fontes, “Las Salinas de San Pedro del Pinatar.” 134 Huete, 8 February 1284: “Otrosi, que ayades la sal en las nostras salinas, assi commo la aviedes en tiempo del infante don Manuel” in Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 32 (135–6).



Notes to pages 267–72

455

135 See Malalana Ureña, La villa de Escalona, 69–72. 136 See Lugon, Saint Guérin, abbé d’Aulps,. 137 On 15 February 1281, Pedro III wrote to Thomas, marquess of Saluzzo, excusing himself from providing aid due to previous commitments to William of Montferrat in the matter of the conquest of Savoyard territories: “debemus tradere dicto Marchioni ratione comitatus Sobaudiae familiam militum et ballisteriorum,” in ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 101r; both Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 913, who does not cite his source, and MHE, doc. 169 (2.17–18), mistakenly give the date as 15 February 1280. Pedro III had previously promised William and Thomas military support in the same campaign when he wrote to them on 27 October 1280: “Juuabimus vos, modo predicto, vos predictos Marchionis Monteferrati et Salucie ab obtiendam et habendam terras quas domus Sabaudie habet et tenens in Lombardia,” in ACA, Reg. 47, fol. 99r–v and Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 930–1, who does not cite his source. See also Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 428–31. 138 Cox, Eagles of Savoy, 434–42. 139 Zurita, Anales, 3.52.582. 140 Salazar y Castro, Casa de Haro, 34. Ballesteros, Alfonso X, 114, 522, ­describes the relationship with the House of Haro but does not recognize that Diego López was the son of Iñigo López de Mendoza. 141 Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 35 (144). 142 Utrilla Utrilla, “Los Maza de Huesca,” 815. 143 Llibre dels feits, chaps. 30, 103 et passim. 144 Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 207, 211, 242. 145 Seville, 13 July 1282: “el maestre don Pero Nunnez ... e los freyres desta ­Orden que se acordaron con él, alçandosenos con la nuestra tierra, e ­fizieron al nuestro linaje que se alçasse contra nos” in DAAX, doc. 501 (528). 146 Zurita, Anales, 3.41.548: “Entonces un caballero que se señaló mucho en esta jornada llamado Sancho Sánchez de Mazuelo a quien el infante don Alonso por sus servicios hizo merced de la villa y castillo de Alcaudete cabo Bugarra, y de la torre de Rejín que está entre Yecla y Chinchilla, tenía gente de guerra en las fronteras del reino y traía sus tratos con el arraez de Algecira que era rebelde al rey de Aragón.” See also Anales, 3.42.549. 147 DAAX, doc. 1 (3–4). 148 Repartimiento de Sevilla, 1.501, 522; 2.42, 242, 316, 318, 331, 335. 149 DAAX, doc. 84 (88–9) and doc. 89 (93). 150 DAAX, doc. 195 (217). 151 “Nicolás Pérez, alcaide de Alicante,” 121–9; however, none of the instances are documented. 152 Bib. Nac., Ms. 13076, fol. 256, published in Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Sancho IV, doc. 581 (3.cccxciv).

456

Notes to pages 272–305

153 Copy of a privilegio rodado granted to Nicolás Pérez on 21 February 1295, copied in turn on 28 July 1305, in Archivos Históricos de la Región de Murcia, AM de Lorca, Pergamino No. 2, online. 154 Zurita, Anales, 5.259. 155 Muntaner, Crónica, chap. 188 (354–7). 156 Torres Fontes, Repartimiento de Murcia, 21–2. 157 See Contesson’s reply to the Council of Elche, Huete, 8 February 1284, in Cabanes Catalá, El Còdex d’Elx, doc. 32 (135–6): “don Çag et don ­Abrahem, nostros alstiquimos, ... por mucho seruicio que fizieron a ­nostro señor don Manuel”; Juan Manuel, Libro enfenido, 1.155, “Don Çag, que fue fisico de mio padre”; Juan Manuel, Armas, 1.136, “don Çag, mio fisico, que era hermano mayor de don Habraan, fisico del rey et mio.” 158 “[E]t murio mi padre en Pennafiel, sabbado dia de Nauidat, era de mill et ccc [et xx] et vn anno” (1.134). Many historians, misled by Juan Manuel’s Chronicon, which gives only the year but not the date of his father’s death, assert that the exact date is unknown: “Era MCCCXXI obit infans dominus Emmanuel in Pennafideli in mense Decembris” in Baist, “Don Juan Manuel, La Crónica complida,” 552. 159 CAX, 77.239; González Jiménez and Carmona Ruiz, Diplomas del Infante Don Sancho, doc. 3771 (663). 160 See DA, doc. 61. 161 See DA, doc. 62. 162 “[D]on Çag, mio fisico, que era hermano mayor de don Habraan, fisico del rey et mio” (1.136). 163 “Et mando vos et consejo vos que en quanto pudieredes aver fisico que sea del linage de Don Çag, que fue fisico de mio padre et mio, que nunca lo dexedes por outro fisico. Ca yo vos digo verdadera mente que fasta el dia de oy nunca falle tan buenos fisicos et tan leales, tan bien en la fisica commo en todos sus fechos” (1.155). 164 For a detailed discussion of these aspects, see Martin, “Alphonse X m ­ audit son fils.” Documentary Appendix 1 Lomax, “Padre,” makes no mention of this document. 2 The transcription given by Rodríguez de Lama, Documentación Alejandro IV, in doc. 464, in Reg. Vat. 25, fol. 243v, col. 39, has “Cockfend,” but this is obviously a misreading of “Cockfeud,” as Cockfield was known in the thirteenth century. 3 The “cannada de Moya” may be a misprint for “Mora.” 4 Agrarian measure equal to 3863 square metres. 5 A square lot equal to 0.1755610 hectares.



Notes to pages 312–27

457

6 A filo de agua (Mod. Sp. hila de agua) is the quantity of water that can be drawn from an acequia or irrigation canal through a hole one handbreadth wide. 7 The term moneda nueva refers to the dinero prieto or dark-coloured billon coin, an amalgam of silver and copper with greater copper content and thus the darker colour, minted by Alfonso X in 1270–71. One gold maravedí, the standard unit of account, was worth sixty dineros prietos. 8 Note that the amount here stipulated refers to the standard monetary unit of account, the gold maravedí, as opposed to the Almansa charter given on the same day, which states that the fine will be paid in moneda nueva or dineros prietos minted in 1270, which represented largely debased billon coins with a higher copper than silver content. 9 Alfonso X attempted to institute a monetary system that would satisfy both the need for liquidity or a sufficient amount of cheap money in circulation and the need for coins with greater purchasing power. To this end he minted, on the one hand, billon coins, or moneda de vellón of silver and copper with little silver content and thus little value, and on the other hand coins of higher silver content, moneda de buena plata. The reference here is to the coins of higher silver content and therefore greater worth. Cf. Ladero Quesada, “Las reformas fiscales y monetarias de Alfonso X,” 43. The continual debasement of the coinage during Alfonso’s reign was one of the major sources of discontent that finally led to Sancho’s rebellion in 1282.

Bibliography

Manuscript Sources AM de Murcia, Pergaminos, no. 94, online at www.regmurcia.com ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 15. Reinado de Jaime I, 1265–1268. http://pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 19. Reinado de Jaime I, 1237–1274. http://pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 20. Reinado de Jaime I, 1274–1276. http://pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 31. Reinado de Jaime I, 1266–1267. http://pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 41. Reinado de Pedro II el Grande, 1276–1280. http:// pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 42. Reinado de Pedro II el Grande, 1279–1280. http:// pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 46. Reinado de Pedro II el Grande, 1278–1284. http:// pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 47. Reinado de Pedro II el Grande, 1278–1284. http:// pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 48. Reinado de Pedro II el Grande, 1280–1280. http:// pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 49. Reinado de Pedro II el Grande, 1280–1281. http:// pares.mcu.es/ ACA. Cancillería, Reg. 50. Reinado de Pedro II el Grande, 1281–1282. http:// pares.mcu.es/ Primary Sources Aguado de Córdova, Antonius Franciscus, et al. Bullarium equestris ordinis S. Iacobi de Spatha. Madrid: Ionnais de Ariztia, 1719. Albertus Magnus. Book of Minerals. Translated by Dorothy Wyckoff. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967. Alfonso X, el Sabio. Cantigas de Santa Maria. Edited by Walter Mettmann. 4 vols. Coimbra: Universidade, 1959–72.

460 Bibliography Alfonso X, el Sabio. Estoria de España. In The Electronic Texts and Concordances of the Prose Works of Alfonso X, El Sabio, edited by Lloyd Kasten, John Nitti, and Wilhemina Jonxis-Henkemens. Madison: HSMS, 1997. Alfonso X, el Sabio. Lapidario. In The Electronic Texts and Concordances of the Prose Works of Alfonso X, El Sabio, edited by Lloyd Kasten, John Nitti, and Wilhemina Jonxis-Henkemens. Madison: HSMS, 1997. Alfonso X, el Sabio. Libros de ajedrez, dados y tablas. In Prose Works of Alfonso X, el Sabio, edited by Francisco Gago Jover, Lloyd Kasten, John Nitti, and Wilhelmina Jonxis Henkemans. CD-ROM. Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1997. Anales toledanos III. Edited by Antonio C. Floriano. In Cuadernos de historia de España (Buenos Aires, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras), 43–4 (1967): 154–87. Annales de Burton (A.D. 1004–1263). In Annales Monastici, Vol. 1, 183–500, edited by Henry R. Luard. Rolls Series Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores or Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland during the Middle Ages, 36.1. London: Longman, Green, 1864; rpt. Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus, 1965. Annales Hamburgenses. Edited by Georg Heinrich Pertz. In Annales aevi Suevici. MGH SS, 16: 380–5. Hannover: Hahn, 1859; rpt. Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1964. Annales Placentini Gibellini a. 1154–1284. Edited by Georg Heinrich Pertz. In MGH SS, 18:457–581. Hanover: Hahn, 1863. Anonymum Sancti Martialis Chronicon. In Recueil des historiens des Gauls et de la France. 21:802–15. Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1855. Archivo general de Navarra: 1274–1321. Edited by María Itziar Zabalza Aldave. 2 vols. Donostia: Eusko Ikaskuntza, 1995–97. Argote de Molina, Gonzalo. Nobleza del Andaluzía. Sevilla: Fernando Díaz, 1588. Argote de Molina, Gonzalo. Succession y linage de don Iuan Manuel. In El Conde Lucanor. Fols. 8r–53v. Sevilla: Hernando Díaz, 1575. Babington, Churchill. Materials for a History of Cockfield, Suffolk. Suffolk, 1880. Baist, Gottfried, ed. “Don Juan Manuel, La Crónica complida.” Romanische Forschungen 7 (1893): 551–6. “Balduinus Imperator Constantinopolitanus de expugnata secundo urbe Constantinopoli.” In Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, 18.520–3. Paris: Imprimerie Royal, 1822. Barrios García, Angel, ed. Documentación medieval de la Catedral de Ávila. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, 1981. Barthélemy, Louis. Inventaire chronologique et analytique des chartes de la Maison des Baux. Marseille: Barlatier-Feissat, 1882. Benvenuto de Sancto Giorgio. Historia Montisferrati. In Rerum Italicarum Scriptores 23:305–762. Milan: Typographia Societatis Palatinae in Regia Curia, 1733.



Bibliography 461

Bofarull y Mascaró, Próspero de, et al., eds. Colección de documentos inéditos del Archivo general de la Corona de Aragón. 41 vols. Barcelona: J.E. Montfort, 1847–1910. Böhmer, Johann Friedrich. Regesta Imperii. V. Die Regesten des Kaiserreichs 1198– 1272. Edited by Julius Ficker and Eduard Winkelmann. 3 vols. Innsbruck: Verlag der Wagner’schen Universitäts Buchhandlung, 1881–1901; rpt. Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1971. Bolzani, Giovani Pierio Valeriano. Hieroglyphica, sive de sacris Aegyptiorum literis commentarii. Basel: Isengrin, 1556. Brandão, Antonio. Terceira parte da Monarchia lusitana que contem a historia de Portugal desde conde Dom Henrique até todo o reinado del Rey Dom Afonso Henriques. Lisboa: Pedro Craesbeck, 1632. Bullarium ordinis militiae de Alcantara. Edited by Ignacio José de Ortega y Cotes et al. Madrid: Tipografía Antonio Marín, 1759. Bullarium ordinis militiae de Calatrava. Edited by Ignacio José de Ortega y Cotes et al. Madrid: Tipografía Antonio Marín, 1761. Burns, Robert I. Diplomatarium of the Crusader Kingdom of Valencia: The Registered Charters of Its Conqueror Jaume I, 1257–1276. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1985. Calendar of Close Rolls. Edward I. Vol. I. 1272–1279. Edited by H.C. Maxwell Lyte. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1900. Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers relating To Great Britain and Ireland: Papal Letters. Vol. 1 1198–1304. Edited by W.H. Bliss. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1893. Calendar of Patent Rolls. Edward I. Vol. I. 1272–1281. Edited by H.C. Maxwell Lyte. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1901. Calendar of the Close Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office. Henry III. A.D. 1227–1272. 10 vols. London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1902–38; rpt. Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus, 1970. Calendar of the Patent Rolls. Henry III. A.D. 1247–1258. London: Public Record Office, 1908; rpt. Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus, 1970. Campi, Pietro Maria. Dell’historia ecclesiastica di Piacenza. 3 vols. Piacenza: G. Bazachi, 1651–62. Cantigas d’Escarnho e de mal dizer dos cancioneiros medievais galego-portugueses. Edited by M. Rodrigues Lapa. 2nd ed. Coimbra: Editorial Galaxia, 1970. Cantigas medievais galego-portuguesas [base de dados online]. Edited by Graça Videira Lopes, Manuel Pedro Ferreira, et al. Lisboa: Instituto de Estudos Medievais, FCSH/NOVA, 2011–. http://cantigas, fcsh.unl.pt. Carlos, Príncipe de Viana. Crónica de los reyes de Navarra. Pamplona: Teodoro Ochoa, 1843; rpt. Valencia, 1971. Cartulaire des comtes de Bourgogne: Mémoires et documents inédits pour servir à l’histoire de la Franche-Comté. Edited by Belles-Lettres et Arts de Besançon et

462 Bibliography de Franche-Comté Académie des Sciences. Vol. 8. Besançon: L’Académie de Besançon, 1838–1946. Cartulario de Don Felipe III, rey de Francia. Edited by Mariano Arigita y Lasa. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Históricos/Sucesores de Hernando, 1913. Cascales, Francisco de. Discursos históricos de la muy noble i muy leal ciudad de Murcia. Murcia, 1621; rpt. Murcia: Francisco Benedito, 1775. Catálogo de los manuscritos e incunables de la Catedral de Córdoba. Edited by Antonio García y García, Francisco Cantelar Rodríguez, and Manuel Nieto Cumplido. Salamanca: Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca, 1976. Cerdá Ruiz-Funes, Joaquín. “Fueros municipales a ciudades del reino de Murcia durante el siglo XIII (1245–1283).” Miscelánea Medieval Murciana 13 (1986): 156–84. Chaves, Bernabé de. Apuntamiento legal sobre el dominio solar, que por expresas reales donaciones pertenece a la Orden de Santiago en todos sus Pueblos ... n.p., n.d. [Madrid, 1719?]; rpt. Barcelona: El Albir, 1975. Chevalier, Ulysse, ed. Regeste dauphinois ou répertoire chronologique & analytique des documents imprimés et manuscrits relatifs à l’histoire du Dauphiné, des origines chrétiennes a l’année 1349. 7 vols. Valence: L’Imprimerie Valentinoise, 1913. Chronica del muy esclarecido principe y rey don Alonso. Valladolid: Sebastián Martínez, 1554. Chronica latina regum Castellae. Edited by Luis Charlo Brea. In Chronica hispana saeculi XIII, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medieualis, 73, 7–118. Turnhout: Brepols, 1997. Chronicon de Cardeña. Edited by Enrique Flórez. In España sagrada, 23.370–80 (1767). Madrid: M.F. Rodriguez, 1747–1879. Chroniques de Saint Magloire. Edited by Etienne Barbazan. In Fabliaux et contes des poètes français. Nouvelle édition by M. Méon, 2:221–35. Paris: Warée, 1808; rpr. Genève, 1976. Colección de documentos para la historia del reino de Murcia. CODOM 1–4. See Torres Fontes, Juan. Colección diplomática del Concejo de Burgos (884–1369). Edited by Emiliano González Díez. Burgos: Ayuntamiento de Burgos, 1984. Colección diplomática medieval de la Orden de Alcántara (1157?–1494). Edited by Carlos de Ayala Martínez. Madrid: Universidad Complutense, 2000. Colección documental de la catedral de León (1269–1300). Edited by José Manuel Ruiz Asencio and José Antonio Martín Fuertes. Vol. 9. León: Centro de Estudios e Investigación San Isidoro, 1994. Collection des chroniques nationales françaises. Edited by J.A. Buchon. 47 vols. Paris: Verdière et J. Carez, 1824–28. Corominas, Joan. Diccionario crítico etimológico de la lengua castellana. 4 vols. Madrid: Ed. Gredos, 1954. Cortes de los antiguos reinos de León y de Castilla. Edited by Real Academia de la Historia. 5 vols. Madrid: Rivadeneyra, 1861–1903.



Bibliography 463

Crónica de Alfonso X. Madrid: Nacional MS. 829. Translated by Paula K. Rodgers. Electronic Texts and Concordances of the Madison Corpus of Early Spanish Manuscripts and Printings. Electronic Texts on CD-ROM Series, 15. Madison and New York: Hispanic Seminar of Medieval Studies, 1999. Crónica de Alfonso X. Según el Ms. II/2777 de la Biblioteca del Palacio Real. Madrid. Edited by Manuel González Jiménez. Murcia: Real Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1998. Crónica de Fernando IV. In Memorias del Rey D. Fernando IV de Castilla, Vol. 1, edited by Antonio Benavides. Madrid: José Rodríguez, 1860. Crónica del rey Don Alfonso el Onceno. Edited by Cayetano Rosell. In Biblioteca de autores españoles, 66:71–392. Madrid: Rivadeneyra, 1875. Crónica del rey Don Alfonso X. Edited by Cayetano Rosell. In Biblioteca de autores españoles, 66:3–66. Madrid: Rivadeneyra, 1875. Crónica del rey Don Sancho. Edited by Cayetano Rosell. In Biblioteca de autores españoles, 66:69–90. Madrid: Rivadeneyra, 1875. Crónicas de los reyes de Castilla. Edited by Cayetano Rosell. In Biblioteca de autores españoles, 66, 68. Madrid: Rivadeneyra, 1875–77. Crónicas generales de España. Edited by Ramón Menéndez Pidal. In Catálogo de la Real Biblioteca, 5. Manuscritos. 3rd ed. Madrid: Real Biblioteca Española, 1918. Crónica Geral de Espanha de 1344. Edited by Luís Filipe Lindley Cintra. 4 vols. Lisbon: Academia Portuguesa da História e Imprensa Nacional Casa da Moeda, 1951–90. Cuarta crónica general: Crónica de España del arzobispo Don Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada. Tradújola en castellano y la continuó hasta el tiempo Don Gonzalo de la Hinojosa, obispo de Burgos, y después un anónimo hasta el año de 1454. Edited by Marqués de la Fuensanta del Valle. In Colección de documentos inéditos para la historia de España. Vols. 105–6. Madrid: Imprenta de José Perales y Martínez, 1893; rpt. Vaduz, Liechtenstein: Kraus, 1966. Daumet, Georges. “Les testaments d’Alphonse X le Savant.” Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes 67 (1906): 70–99. del Giudice, Giuseppe. Codice diplomatico del regno di Carlo 1. e 2. d’Angio ... dal 1265 al 1309. 3 vols. Napoli: Stamperia della R. Università, 1863–1902. Del Valle Curieses, Rafael. “Archivo Municipal de Palencia: Privilegios y cartas reales concedidos a la ciudad en la Edad Media (Regesta y comentarios).” Actas del I Congreso de historia de Palencia: Castillo de Monzón de Campos, 3–5 Diciembre 1985. 2:115–54. Valladolid: Diputación Provincial de Palencia, 1987. Desclot, Bernat. Llibre del rei en Pere. In Les quatre grans chròniques, edited by Ferran Soldevila. Barcelona: Selecta, 1971. Diplomatari de Pere el Gran: 1. Cartes i Pergamins (1258–1285). Edited by Stefano M. Cingolani. Barcelona: Fundación Noguera, 2011. Diplomatarium regni Valentiae regnante Iacobo I. Edited by Robert Ignatius Burns. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2001.

464 Bibliography Documentación del Monasterio de Las Huelgas de Burgos. Edited by José Manuel Lizoain Garrido and Araceli Castro Garrido. 10 vols. Burgos: J.M. Garrido Garrido, 1985–91. Documentación del Monasterio de San Salvador de Oña: 1032–1284. Edited by Isabel Oceja Gonzalo. Burgos: J.M. Garrido Garrido, 1986. Documentación del Monasterio de San Zoilo de de Carrión. Edited by Julio A. Pérez Celada. Burgos: J.M. Garrido Garrido, 1986. Documentación medieval de la casa de Velada: Instituto Valencia de Don Juan. Edited by Paulina López Pita, Gregorio del Ser Quijano, and Carmelo de Luis López. 2 vols. Ávila: Diputación Provincial de Ávila/Caja de Ahorros de Ávila, 2002. Documentación medieval de la Catedral de Segovia (1115–1300). Edited by LuisMiguel Villar García. Acta Salmanticensia; Textos Medievales, 15. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca y Universidad de Deusto, 1990. Documentos de Gregorio X (1272–1276): Referentes a España. Edited by Santiago Domínguez Sánchez. León: Universidad de León, 1997. Documentos de la época de D. Alfonso el Sabio. Edited by Jaime Villanueva. In Memorial histórico español, vols. 1–2. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia, 1851. Documentos de la Iglesia Colegial de Santa María la Mayor (hoy Metropolitana) de Valladolid, siglos XI–XIII. Edited by Manuel Mañueco Villalobos and José Zurita Nieto. 3 vols. Valladolid: Imp. Castellana, 1917–20. Documentos del Archivo general de la Villa de Madrid. Edited by Timoteo Domingo Palacio. 3 vols. Madrid: Archivo Municipal, 1888–1907. Documentos inéditos de Alfonso X el Sabio y del Infante su hijo Don Sancho: Estudio, transcripción y facsímiles. Edited by Juan Manuel del Estal. Alicante: J.M. del Estal, 1984. Dubois, Pierre. De recuperatione Terre Sancte. Edited by Ch.-V. Langlois. Paris: Alphonse Picard, 1891. El Còdex d’Elx. Transcripciò, edición i notes by María Luisa Cabanes Català. València: Ajuntament d’Elx, Generalitat Valenciana, Consell Valencià de Cultura, 1995. Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed., online. Edited by P. Bearman et al. Leiden: Brill Online Reference Works, 2002. Epistolae saeculi XIII e regestis pontificum Romanorum selectae. Edited by Karl Rodenberg and Georg Heinrich Pertz. MGH, 18, 19, 28. Berlin: Weidmann, 1883–94. España sagrada. Edited by Enrique Flórez. 51 vols. Madrid, M.F. Rodríguez, 1747–1879. Espinosa de los Monteros, Pablo de. Historia, antigüedades y grandezas de la muy noble y muy leal Ciudad de Sevilla. 2 parts. Sevilla: Matías Clavijo, 1627–30. Estal Gutiérrez, Juan Manuel del, ed. Documentos inéditos de Alfonso X el Sabio y del Infante su hijo Don Sancho. Alicante: Librería Universitaria, 1984.



Bibliography 465

Fuero de Salamanca. Edited by Julián Sánchez Ruano. Salamanca: Sebastián Cerezo, 1870. Gallofre Guinovart, Rafael. Documentos del reinado de Alfonso III de Aragón relativos al antiguo reino de Valencia y contenidos en los registros de la corona de Aragón. Valencia: Institución Alfonso el Magnánimo, 1968. Giraldus Cambrensis. De rebus a se gestis. In Opera, edited by J.S. Brewer. Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi Scriptores, 21.1. London: Longman, Green, Longman and Roberts, 1861. 1–122. González Jiménez, Manuel, ed. Diplomatario andaluz de Alfonso X. Sevilla: El Monte, Caja de Huelva y Sevilla, 1991. González Jiménez, Manuel, and Antonio González Gómez, eds. El libro del Repartimiento de Jerez de la Frontera: Estudio y edición. Cádiz: Instituto de Estudios Gaditanos, 1980. González Jiménez, Manuel, and María Antonia Carmona Ruiz, eds. Diplomas del Infante Don Sancho. In Documentación e itinerario de Alfonso X el Sabio, 609–64. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2012. González Jiménez, Manuel, and María Antonia Carmona Ruiz, eds. Documentación e itinerario de Alfonso X el Sabio. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 2012. Gran Crónica de Alfonso XI. Edited by Diego Catalán. 2 vols. Madrid: Seminario Menéndez Pidal and Gredos, 1977. Guillaume Anelier de Toulouse. Histoire de la guerre de Navarre en 1276 et 1277. Edited by Francisque Michel. In Collection de documents inédits sur l’histoire de France. Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1856. Guillaume de Nangis. Gesta sanctae memoriae Ludovici regis Franciae. Edited by MM. Daumon et Naudet. In Recueil des historiens de Gaule et de la France, 20.309–462. Paris: L’Imprimerie Royale, 1740. Huarte y Echenique, Amalio. “Catálogo de documentos relacionados con la Historia de España, existentes en los archivos portugueses. Siglos XI al XV.” Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 107 (1935): 763–804. Huici, Ambrosio, ed. Colección diplomática de Jaime I, el Conquistador, años 1217–1253. 2 vols. Valencia: F. Vives Mora, 1916. Huici Miranda, Ambrosio, and María de los Desamparados Cabanes Pecourt, eds. Documentos de Jaime I de Aragón. 5 vols. Valencia: Anubar, 1976–88. Ibn Abi Zar. Rawd al-Qirtas. Edited and translated by Ambrosio Huici Miranda. 2 vols. 2nd ed. Valencia: J. Nácher, 1964. Ibn Khaldūn. Histoire des Berbères et des dynasties musulmanes. Translated by M. Le Baron de Slane. Alger: Imprimerie du Gouvernement, 1852–56. Izquierdo Benito, Ricardo. Privilegios reales otorgados a Toledo durante la Edad Media (1101–1494). Toledo: Instituto Provincial de Investigaciones y Estudios Toledanos, CSIC, Diputación Provincial, 1990. Jacopo da Acqui. Chronicon imaginis mundi. Edited by G. Avogadro. In Historiae patriae monumenta, Scriptores, III.1358–1626. Turin: E Regio Typographeo, 1848.

466 Bibliography Jaime I. Crònica o Llibre dels feits. Edited by Ferran Soldevila. 4th ed. Barcelona: Edicions 62, 2000. Jimena Jurado, Martín de. Catálago de los obispos de las iglesias catedrales de la diócesis de Jaén y Anales eclesiásticos de este obispado. Madrid: Domingo García y Morrás, 1654. Jiménez de Rada, Rodrigo. De rebus Hispanie sive historia gothica. Edited by Juan Fernández Valverde. Turnhout: Brepols, 1987. Jofré de Loaysa. Crónica de los reyes de Castilla. Edited by Agustín Ubieto Arteta. Valencia: Anubar, 1971. Juan Gil de Zamora. Liber de preconiis Hispanie. Edited by Fidel Fita. In Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 5 (1884): 131–200. Juan Manuel. Chronicon. See Baist, Gottfried, ed., La Crónica complida. Juan Manuel. Libro de los estados. Edited by R.B. Tate and I.R. MacPherson. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974. Juan Manuel. Obras completas. Ed. José Manuel Blecua. 2 vols. Madrid: Gredos, 1981–83. Körting, Gustav. Lateinisch-romanisches Wörterbuch: Etymologisches Wörterbuch der romanischen Hauptsprachen. 3rd ed. New York: G.E. Stechert, 1923. Layettes du Trésor des Chartes. Edited by Joseph de Laborde. Vol. 3. Paris: Henri Plon, 1875; rpt. Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus, 1977. Lera Maíllo, José Carlos de. Catálogo de los documentos medievales de la Catedral de Zamora. Zamora: Instituto de Estudios Zamoranos “Florián de Ocampo,” 1999. Libro de Becero del Convento Real de S. Juan y S. Pablo de la Villa de Peñafiel. Edited by Fr. Vicente Velázquez de Figueroa. Archivo Histórico Nacional, Códices y Cartularios, Libro 1264. Peñafiel, 1768–72. Livro de Linhagens do Conde D. Pedro. Edited by José Mattoso. In Portugaliae monumenta historica: A saeculo octavo post Christum usque ad quintumdecimum. Vol. 2: 1,2. Lisbon: Academia das Ciências, 1981. López de Ayala, Pero. Texto y concordancias del Libro de la caça de las aues, MS. Additional 16392 de la British Library. Edited by José Manuel Fradejas Rueda. Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1992. Lucas de Tuy. Chronicon mundi. Edited by Emma Falque. Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaevalis, 74. Turnhout: Brepols, 2003. Manrique, Fr. Angel. Cisterciencium seu verius ecclesiasticorum annalium a condito cistercio. Vol. 3. Lugduni: Boissat & Lavrent, 1649. Marín, Pedro. Miraculos romanzados como sacó Santo Domingo los cativos de catividad. In Sebastián de Vergara, Vida y milagros del thaumaturgo español, 128–229. Madrid: Herederos de Francisco del Hierro, 1736. Marín, Pero. Los milagros romanzados de Santo Domingo de Silos, de Pero Marín. Edited by Manuel González Jiménez and Angel Luis Molina Molina. Murcia: Real Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 2008.



Bibliography 467

Martínez Ferrando, Jesús Ernesto. Catálogo de la documentación relativa al antiguo reino de Valencia existente en los registros de la cancillería real. II: Pedro el Grande. Madrid: Imp. Góngora, 1934. Martínez Morellá, Vicente, ed. Privilegios y franquezas de Alfonso X el Sabio a Alicante. Alicante: Artes Gráficas Alicante, 1951. Matthew Paris. Chronica majora. Edited by Henry Richards Luard. 7 vols. In Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores; or Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland during the Middle Ages, 57. London: Longman, 1872–83; rpt. Wiesbaden: Kraus, 1964. Memorial histórico español: Colección de documentos, opúsculos y antigüedades que publica la Real Academia de la Historia. 50 vols. Madrid: Imprenta de la Real Academia de la Historia, 1851–1917. Morales, Ambrosio de. Noticias históricas sacadas del Archivo de Uclés, Tomo II. Edited by Juan Antonio Fernández. Madrid: Benito Cano, 1793. Ortiz de Zúñiga, Diego. Anales eclesiásticos y seculares de Sevilla. 5 vols. Madrid: Imprenta Real, 1677; rpt. 2 vols. 1795–96. Pérard, Estienne. Recueil de plusieurs pièces curieuses servant à l’histoire de Bourgogne. Paris: Claude Cramoisy, 1664. Posse, Otto. Analecta Vaticana. Innsbruck: Libraria Academica Wagneriana, 1878. Potthast, August. Regesta pontificum romanorum inde ab a. post Christum natum MCXVIII ad a. MCCCIV. 2 vols. Berlin, 1874–75; rpt. Graz: Adakemische Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1957. Primera crónica general: Estoria de España que mandó componer Alfonso el Sabio. Edited by Ramón Menéndez Pidal. Madrid: Bailly-Bailliere e Hijos, 1906. Quintana Prieto, Augusto. La documentación pontificia de Inocencio IV. 2 vols. Rome: Instituto Español de Historia Eclesiastica, 1987. Rades y Andrada, Fr. Francisco de. Chronica de las tres órdenes y cauallerías de Santiago, Calatraua y Alcantara. Toledo: Juan de Ayala, 1572. Raynaldi, Odorico. Annales ecclesiastici. Romae: Ex Typographia Varesij, 1667. Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Silos. Edited by Marius Férotin. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1897. Regesta Honorii Papae III. Edited by Pietro Presutti. 2 vols. Rome: Typographia Vaticana, 1888–95. Registres de Grégoire IX. Edited by Lucien Auvray. Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome. 2. série, 9. Paris: Fontemoing, 1908. Registres de Grégoire X (1272–76) et Jean XXI (1276–77). Edited by Jean Guiraud and F. Cadier. Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome 2. série, 12.3. Paris: Thorin, 1898. Registres de Martin IV. Edited by F. Olivier-Martin. Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome, 2nd series, 16. Paris: Fontemoing, 1901.

468 Bibliography Registres de Nicolas III (1277–1280). Edited by Jules Gay. 5 vols. Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome, 2nd series, 14. Paris: Fontemoing, 1898–1938. Registres d’Innocent IV. Edited by Élie Berger. 4 vols. Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome, 2nd series, 1. Paris: Thorin, Fontemoing, 1884–1921. Registres d’Urbain IV (1261–1264). Edited by Jean Guirard. 4 vols. Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome, 2nd series, 13. Paris: Thorin, Fontemoing, 1900–1956. Repartimiento de Lorca. Edited by Juan Torres Fontes. 2nd ed. Murcia: Real Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1994. Repartimiento de Murcia. Edited by Juan Torres Fontes. Murcia: CSIC/ Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1960. Repartimiento de Orihuela. Edited by Juan Torres Fontes. Murcia: Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1988. Repartimiento de Sevilla. Edited by Julio González González. 2 vols. Sevilla: CSIC/Escuela de Estudios Medievales, 1951. Rerum Italicarum Scriptores. Edited by Ludovico Antonio Muratori. 25 vols. Milan: Societatis Palatinae, 1723–51. Rodgers, Paula K. Prolegomena to a Critical Edition of the Crónica de Alfonso X. University of California, Davis: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 1984. Rodríguez Campomanes, Pedro. Dissertaciones históricas del orden y cavallería de los Templarios. Madrid: Antonio Pérez de Soto, 1747. Rodríguez de Lama, Ildefonso, ed. La documentación pontificia de Alejandro IV 1254–1261. Monumenta Hispaniae Vaticana. Sección: Registros, 5. Rome: Instituto Español de Historia Eclesiástica, 1976. Rodríguez López, Amancio. El Real Monasterio de Las Huelgas de Burgos y el Hospital del Rey. 2 vols. Burgos: Imprenta y Librería del Centro Católico, 1907. Rolandino da Padova. Rolandini Patavini Chronica. Edited by Philipp Jaffé. In MGH SS, 19.32–147. Hannover: Hahn, 1866. Riccardo di San Germano. Chronica. Edited by Carlo Alberto Garufi. In Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, vol. 7(2), edited by Lodovico Antonio Muratori. Bologna: Zanichelli, 1936–38. Rymer, Thomas, ed. Foedera. 10 vols. 3rd ed. Hagae Comitis, 1739–1745; rpt. Farnborough: Gregg, 1967. Salazar y Castro, Luis de. Historia genealógica de la Casa de Haro. 3 vols. Madrid: Mateo de Llanos y Guzmán, 1697; rpt. Bilbao: Wilsen Editorial, 1988. Salazar y Castro, Luis de. Indice de las glorias de la Casa Farnese. Madrid: Francisco del Hierro, 1716. Salazar y Castro, Luis de. Pruebas de la historia de la Casa de Lara. Madrid: Mateo de Llanos y Guzmán, 1694.



Bibliography 469

Salazar y Castro, Luis de. Reparos históricos sobre los doce primeros años del tomo VII de la historia de España. Alcalá: Juan Antonio Pimentel, 1723. Salimbene de Adam. Cronica. Edited by Oswald Holder-Eggar. MGH SS, 32. Leipzig: K.W. Hiersemann, 1905–13. Sánchez de Arévalo, Rodrigo. Compendiosa historia hispanica. Rome: Ulrich Han, 1470. Servion, Jean. Gestez et croniques de la mayson de Savoye: Publiées d’après le manuscrit unique de la Bibliothèque Nationale de Turin. 2 vols. Edited by Frédéric-Emmanuel Bollati. Turin: F. Casanova, 1879. Siete Partidas del Rey Don Alfonso el Sabio, cotejadas con varios códices antiguos por la Real Academia de la Historia. 3 vols. Madrid: Imprenta Real, 1807. Tentative Dictionary of Medieval Spanish. Edited by Lloyd A. Kasten and Florian J. Cody. 2nd ed. New York: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 2001. Thesaurus novus anecdotorum: Tomus primus ... Epistolas et diplomata. Edited by Edmund Martène and Ursin Durand. Paris: Florentini Delaulne et al., 1717. Torres Fontes, Juan, ed. Colección de documentos inéditos para la historia de Murcia. 18 vols to date. Murcia: Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1963–. Torres Fontes, Juan, ed. Documentos de Alfonso X el Sabio. In Colección de documentos para la historia del reino de Murcia. CODOM 1. Murcia: Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1963. Torres Fontes, Juan, ed. Documentos del siglo XIII. In Colección de documentos para la historia del reino de Murcia. CODOM 2. Murcia: Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1969. Torres Fontes, Juan. Documentos de Sancho IV. In Colección de documentos para la historia del reino de Murcia. CODOM 4. Murcia: Academia Alfonso X el Sabio/CSIC, 1977. Torres Fontes, Juan. Documentos para la historia medieval de Ceutí. Murcia: Real Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1998. Torres Fontes, Juan, ed. Colección de documentos para la historia del reino de Murcia. In Colección de documentos para la historia del reino de Murcia, CODOM 3. Murcia: Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1973. Ubieto Arteta, Antonio. Colección diplomática de Cuéllar. Segovia: Diputación Provincial de Segovia, 1961. Ulloa y Golfín, Pedro de. Fueros y privilegios de la Villa de Cáceres. Cáceres: n.p., 1679. Veterem scriptorum et monumentorum historicorum, dogmaticorum moralium, amplissima collectio. Edited by Edmond Martène and Ursin Durand. 9 vols. Paris: F. Montalant, 1724–33. Vic, Claude de, and Joseph Vaisette. Histoire générale de Languedoc. 15 vols. Toulouse, 1872–92. Vigil, Ciriaco Miguel. Colección histórico-diplomática del Ayuntamiento de Oviedo. Oviedo: Pardo, Gusano Compañía Editores, 1889.

470 Bibliography Winkelmann, Eduard. Acta imperii inedita saeculi XIII et XIV: Urkunden und Briefe zur Geschichte des Kaiserreichs und des Königreichs Sizilien. 2 vols. Insbruck: Verlag der Wagner’schen Universitäts-Buchhandlung, 1880; rpt. Aalen: Scientia Verlag, 1964. Winkelmann, Eduard. “Ungedruckte Urkunden und Briefe zur Reichsgeschichte des dreizehnten Jahrhunderts.” Mittheilungen des Instituts für Oesterreichische Geschichtsforschung 14 (1893): 87–105. Zurita, Jerónimo. Anales de la Corona de Aragón: Los cinco libros primeros de la primera parte. Madrid: Pedro Bernuz, 1562. Zurita, Jerónimo. Indices de las gestas de los reyes de Aragón desde comienzos del reinado al año 1410. Edited and translated by Angel Canellas López. 2 vols. Zaragoza: Institución Fernando el Católico, 1984. Secondary Sources Abegg, Regine. Königs- und Bischofs monumente: Die Skulpturen des 13. Jahrhunderts im Kreuzgang der Kathedrale von Burgos. Zürich: Zurich InterPublishers, 1999. Acero y Abad, Nicolás. Historia de la muy noble y leal villa de Mula. Murcia: Albaladejo, n.d. [1886?]. Agapito y Revilla, Juan. El Real Monasterio de las Huelgas de Burgos: Apuntes para un estudio histórico-artístico. Valladolid: La Nueva Pincia, 1903. Agustí y Casanovas, Jacinto, Pedro Voltes Bou, and José Vives. Manual de cronología española y universal. Madrid: CSIC, 1942. Alonso Getino, Luis G. Dominicos españoles confesores de Reyes. Madrid: Santo Domingo el Real, 1917. Altschul, Michael. A Baronial Family in Medieval England: The Clares, 1217–1314. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1965. Álvarez Borge, Ignacio. “Los dominios de un noble de la corte castellana en la primera mitad del siglo XIII. García Fernández de Villamayor.” Hispania: Revista Española de Historia 68.230 (September-December 2008): 647–706. Amador de los Ríos, José, and Juan de Dios de la Rada y Delgado. Historia de la Villa y Corte de Madrid. 4 vols. Madrid: Ferra de Mena, 1860–64. Arco y Garay, Ricardo del. Sepulcros de la Casa Real de Castilla. Madrid: CSIC, 1954. Arranz Guzmán, Ana. “Reconstrucción y verificación de las cortes castellanoleonesas: La participación del clero.” En la España Medieval 13 (1990): 33–132. Asenjo González, María. “Fiscalidad regia y sociedad en los consejos de la Extremadura castellano-oriental durante el reinado de Alfonso X.” In Homenaje al Profesor Juan Torres Fontes, 1.69–84. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, Academia de Alfonso X el Sabio, 1987. Aspin, Isabel S.T., ed. Anglo-Norman Political Songs. Oxford: Blackwell, 1953.



Bibliography 471

Ayala Martínez, Carlos. Directrices fundamentales de la política peninsular de Alfonso X. Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid and Aldecoa, 1986. Ayala Martínez, Carlos. “Paces castellano-aragonesas de Campillo-Ágreda (1281).” En la España Medieval 5 (1986): 151–68. Ayala Martínez, Carlos de. “Alfonso X: Beaucaire y el fin de la pretensión imperial.” Hispania: Revista Española de Historia 47.165 (1987): 5–31. Ballesteros y Beretta, Antonio. Alfonso X el Sabio. Barcelona: Salvat, 1963. Ballesteros y Beretta, Antonio. “Burgos y la rebelión del infante don Sancho.” Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 119 (1946): 93–194. Ballesteros y Beretta, Antonio. “Don Juan ‘El Canciller.’” Correo erudito 1 (1940): 145–51. Ballesteros y Beretta, Antonio. “Don Remondo de Losana, obispo de Segovia.” Correo Erudito 1 (1940): 313–18. Ballesteros y Beretta, Antonio. Historia de España y su influencia en la historia universal. 12 vols. 2nd ed. Barcelona-Buenos Aires: Salvat, 1943–. Ballesteros y Beretta, Antonio. “Itinerario de Alfonso X, rey de Castilla.” Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 104 (1934): 49–88, 455–516; 105 (1934): 123–80; 106 (1935): 83–150; 107 (1935): 21–76, 381–418; 108 (1936): 15–42; 109 (1936): 377–460. Ballesteros y Beretta, Antonio. “La reconquista de Murcia: 1243–1943.” Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 111 (1942): 133–50. Ballesteros y Beretta, Antonio. Sevilla en el siglo XIII. Madrid: Juan Pérez Torres, 1913. Barraclough, Geoffrey. The Medieval Papacy. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1968. Barros Días, Isabel de. “La blasfemia del rey Sabio: Vicisitudes de una leyenda (nuevas hipótesis respecto a la datación y la posición relativa del texto portugués).” Anuario de Estudios Medievales 45.2 (2015): 733–52. Barthe Porcel, Julio. “Prontuario medieval.” Anales de la Universidad de Murcia (Derecho) 32.1–2 (1974): 5–71, 303–94. Baumel, Jean. Histoire d’une seigneurie du Midi de la France. 2 vols. Montpellier: Causee et cie., 1969–71. Baylen, Joseph O. “John Maunsell and the Castilian Treaty of 1254: A Study of the Clerical Diplomat.” Traditio 17 (1961): 482–91. Benavides, Antonio, ed. Memorias de D. Fernando IV de Castilla. 2 vols. Madrid: José Rodríguez, 1860. Berganza y Arce, Francisco. Antigüedades de España. 2 vols. Madrid: Francisco del Hierro, 1719–21. Beroiz Lazcano, Marcelino, Mikel Gómez Aguirre, and Fernando Serrano Larráyoz. “Léxico sobre armamento y utillaje militar medieval. Navarra (siglos XIII–XVI): Un proyecto en curso.” Cuadernos del Instituto Historia de la Lengua 3 (2009): 203–14.

472 Bibliography Bohigas, Pedro. “La Visión de Alfonso X y las Profecías de Merlín.” Revista de Filología Española 25 (1941): 383–98. Box Amorós, Margarita. “II. El regadío medieval en España: Época árabe y conquista cristiana.” In Hitos históricos de los regadíos españoles, edited by A. Gil Olcina and A. Morales Gil, 49–89. Madrid: Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación, 1992. Bozzola, Annibale. Un capitano di guerra e signore subalpino: Guglielmo VII di Montferrato (1254–1292). Torino: Bocca, 1922. Bruhn de Hoffmeyer, Ada. Arms and Armour in Spain: A Short Survey. 2 vols. Madrid: Instituto sobre Armas Antiguas/CSIC, 1972–82. Burns, Robert I. “The Crusade against Al-Azraq: A Thirteenth-Century Mudejar Revolt in International Perspective.” The American Historical Review 93.1 (1988): 80–106. Busson, Arnold. Die Doppelwahl des Jahres 1257 und das römische Königthum: Alfonso X. von Castilien: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des grossen interregnums: Mit bisher ungedruckten Brieften. Münster: Druck und Verlag des Aschendorff’schen Buchhandlung, 1886. Cabezuelo Pliego, José Vicente. Poder público y administración territorial en el reino de Valencia, 1239–1348: El oficio de la procuración. 2 vols. Doctoral dissertation, Universidad de Alicante, 1996. Calvo, José María. Apuntes históricos sobre el célebre Monasterio de Santa María de la Real de las Huelgas. Burgos: Imprenta de Villanueva, 1846. Cantera Burgos, Francisco. “Miranda en tiempos de Alfonso X.” Boletín de la Comisión Provincial de Monumentos Históricos y Artísticos de Burgos 65 (1938): 137–50. Carpenter, David. “The Lord Edward’s Oath to Aid and Counsel Simon de Montfort, 15 October 1259.” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 58 (1985): 226–37. Casal Martínez, Federico. Leyendas, tradiciones y hechos históricos de Cartagena. Cartagena: Imp. Horacio Escarabajal, 1911; rpt. Cartagena: Athenas Ediciones, 1966. Catalán Menéndez Pidal, Diego. “Alfonso X historiador.” In La Estoria de España de Alfonso X: Creación y evolución, 11–44. Madrid: Seminario Menéndez Pidal, Fundación Ramón Menéndez Pidal, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 1992. Catalán Menéndez Pidal, Diego. “El Toledano romanzado y las Estorias del fecho de los godos del siglo XV.” In Estudios dedicados a James Homer Herriott, 9–112. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1966. Cerdá Ruiz-Funes, Joaquín. “Para un estudio sobre los Adelantados Mayores de Castilla (siglos XIII–XV).” In Actas del II Symposium de Historia de la Administración, 183–221. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios Administrativos, 1971. Chabás y Llorens, Roque. Episcopologio valentino. Valencia: F. Vives Mora, 1909.



Bibliography 473

Chevalier, Ulysse. Notice chronologico-historique sur les Évêques de Valence d’après des documents paléographiques inédits. Valence: Jules Céas et Fils, 1867. Chifflet, Jean-Jacques. Vesontio civitas imperialis libera. Lyon: Claudium Cayne, 1618. Chifflet, Jean-Jacques. Vindiciae Hispanicae, in qvibvs arcana regia, politica, genealogica, pvblico pacis bono lvce donantvr. Antwerp: Plantiniana Balthasaris Moreti, 1645. Colmenares, Diego de. Historia de la insigne ciudad de Segovia y conpendio delas historias de Castilla. 2 vols. Madrid: D. Diez, 1640; rpt. Segovia: Academia de Historia y Arte de San Quirce, 1969. Copinger, Walter A., ed. County of Suffolk: Its History as Disclosed by Existing Records and Other Documents ... 5 vols. London: H. Sotheran, 1904–[1905]. Cox, Eugene L. The Eagles of Savoy: The House of Savoy in Thirteenth-Century Europe. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1974. Craddock, Jerry R. “Dynasty in Dispute: Alfonso X el Sabio and the Succession to the Throne of Castile and Leon in History and Legend.” Viator 17 (1986): 197–220. Craddock, Jerry R. “La cronología de las obras legislativas de Alfonso X.” Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español 51 (1981): 365–418. Crespi de Valldaura, Gonzalo. “Privilegio rodado de Alfonso X concediendo mercado semanal a Santa Cruz de Campezo.” Revista de Cultura e Investigación Vasca 14 (2001): 145–54. Douët d’Arcq, Louis Claude. Collection de Sceaux. Vol. 3: Sceaux Étrangers. Paris: Henri Plon, 1868. Daumet, Georges. Mémoire sur les relations de la France et de la Castille de 1255 à 1230. Paris: Fontemoing, 1913. Deknatel, Frederick B. “The Thirteenth Century Gothic Sculpture of the Cathedrals of Burgos and León.” The Art Bulletin 17 (1935): 243–389. del Giudice, Giuseppe. La famiglia di re Manfredi. 2nd ed. Napoli: M. D’Auria, 1896. Delle Donne, Fulvio. “Goffredo di Alatri.” In Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani 57 (2002), on-line: www.treccani.it. Denholm-Young, Noël. Richard of Cornwall. New York: William Salloch, 1947. Devoto, Daniel. Introducción al estudio de Don Juan Manuel, y en particular de El Conde Lucanor. Madrid: Editorial Castalia, 1972. Deyermond, Alan. “Cuentos orales y estructura formal en el Libro de las tres razones (Libro de las armas).” In Don Juan Manuel: VII Centenario, 75–87. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1982. Diccionario de historia eclesiástica de España. 4 vols. Madrid: Instituto Enrique Flórez, CSIC, 1975. Dictionary of the Middle Ages. Edited by Joseph R. Strayer. 13 vols. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1982–89.

474 Bibliography Díez de Revenga, Francisco Javier. “El Libro de las armas de don Juan Manuel: Algo más que un libro de historia.” In Don Juan Manuel: VII Centenario, pp. 103–16. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1982. Engels, Odilo. “El Rey Jaime I de Aragón, y la política internacional del siglo XIII.” In Jaime I y su época: X Congreso de Historia de la Corona de Aragón, edited by Charles Emmanuel Dufourcq, 1.215–40. Zaragoza: Institución Fernando el Católico, 1979. Entwistle, William James. The Arthurian Legend in the Literatures of the Spanish Peninsula. London and Toronto: Dent and Sons, 1925. Escolano, Gaspar Juan. Década primera de la historia de la insigne y coronada ciudad de Valencia. Valencia: Pedro Patricio Mey, 1610. Escrivá de Balaguer, José María. La abadesa de Las Huelgas: Estudio teológico jurídico. Madrid: Rialp, 1974. Escudero de la Peña, José María. “Súplica hecha al Papa Juan XXI para que absolviese al rey de Castilla D. Alfonso X del juramento de no acuñar otra moneda que los dineros prietos.” Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos 2.4 (1872): 58–60. Espinalt y García, Bernardo. Atlante español ... Tercera parte en que se concluye el reino de Jaén. Vol. 13. Madrid: Imprenta de González, 1787. Esquerdo, Onofre. Nobiliario valenciano. Edited by José Martínez Ortiz. Valencia: Direcció General del Llibre, Arxius i Biblioteques, 2001. Eubel, Konrad, ed. Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, sive, Summorum pontificum, S.R.E. cardinalium, ecclesiarum antistitum series. 3 vols. Monasterii: Sumptibus et typis Librariae Regensbergianae, 1898–1910. Fanta, Adolf. “Ein Bericht über die Ansprüche des Königs Alfonso auf den deutschen Thron.” Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschischtforschung 6 (1885): 94–104. Fatheringham, John Knight. Marco Sanudo, Conqueror of the Archipelago. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1915. Fernández Conde, Francisco Javier, Isabel Torrente Fernández, and Guadalupe de la Noval Menéndez. El monasterio de San Pelayo de Oviedo. Historia y Fuentes. I: Colección diplomática (996–1325). Oviedo: Monasterio de San Pelayo and BPR Publishers, 1978. Fernández de Pulgar, Pedro. Historia secular y eclesiástica de la ciudad de Palencia. 4 vols. Madrid: Viuda de Francisco Nieto, 1679–80. Fernández Duro, Cesáreo. Memorias históricas de la ciudad de Zamora. 4 vols. Madrid: Sucesores de Rivadeneyra, 1882–83. Fernández Martín, Luis. “Colección diplomática del monasterio de San Pelayo de Cerrato.” Hispania Sacra 26 (1973): 281–324. Ferrer i Mallol, María Teresa. Entre la paz y la guerra: La Corona catalanoaragonesa y Castilla en la Baja Edad Media. Barcelona: CSIC, 2005. Flórez, Enrique. Memorias de las reynas cathólicas. 2 vols. 2nd ed. Madrid: Antonio Marín, 1770.



Bibliography 475

Flórez de Ocariz, Juan. Libro segundo de las genealogías del Nuevo Reyno de Granada. Madrid: Joseph Fernández de Buendía, 1676. Fontana, Pierina, ed. Documenti sulle relazioni tra la Casa di Savoia e la Santa Sede nel Medio Evo: 1066–1268. Turin: Ind. Tipogr. Romana, 1939. Fradejas Rueda, José Manuel. Textos clásicos de cetrería, montería y caza. CD-ROM. Madrid: Fundación Histórica Tavera, 1999. Francisco Olmos, José María de. “La moneda en la Castilla bajomedieval: Medio de propaganda e instrumento económico.” In II Jornadas Científicas sobre documentación de la Corona de Castilla (siglos XIII–XV), 277–348. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Dpto. de Ciencias y Técnicas Historiográficas, 2003. Fuente, Vicente de la. Historia eclesiástica de España. 6 vols. 2nd ed. Madrid: Impresores y Libreros del Reino, 1873–75. Funes, Leonardo. “La blasfemia del Rey Sabio: Itinerario narrativo de una leyenda (I–II).” Incipit 13 (1993): 51–70 and 14 (1994): 69–101. Fuster Ruíz, Francisco. “Albacete y el tema regional (aportación a la historia de un problema).” In Congreso de Historia de Albacete: 8–11 de diciembre de 1983. Vol. 2: Edad Media, 117–52. Albacete: Instituto de Estudios Albacetenses, 1984. Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Mercedes. “La Reina doña Mencía.” In Miscelânea de estudos em honra de d. Carolina Michäelis de Vasconcellos: Revista da Universidade de Coimbra, 11.501–39. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade, 1933. Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Mercedes. Sancho IV de Castilla. 3 vols. Madrid: Tipografía de la “Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos,” 1922–28. Galland, Bruno. “Un Savoyard sur le siège de Lyon au XIIIe siècle: Philippe de Savoie.” Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartres 146 (1988): 31–67. García de la Borbolla, Ángeles. “Presencia de navarros y vascos en la repoblación de Murcia.” Anales de la Universidad de Alicante: Historia Medieval 11 (1996–7): 565–77. García Díaz, Isabel. “Los señoríos murcianos del infante don Manuel.” Miscelánea Medieval Murciana 13 (1986): 186–99. García Sáinz de Baranda, Julián. Apuntes históricos sobre la ciudad de Medina de Pomar. Burgos: Tip. “El Monte Carmelo,” 1917. García Soriano, Justo. Vocabulario del dialecto murciano con un estudio preliminar y un apéndice de documentos regionales. Madrid: C. Bermejo, 1932. Gardner, Alice. The Lascarids of Nicea: The Story of an Empire in Exile. London: Methuen, 1912. Garibay, Esteban de. Compendio historial de las chronicas y vniversal historia de todos los reynos de España. 40 vols. Anveres: Christophoro Plantino, 1571; rpt. Barcelona: Sebastián de Cormellas, 1628. Gavilanes Laso, José Luis. “Portugal y Valencia de Don Juan: Dos engarces medievales.” Tierras de León: Revista de la Diputación Provincial 38.109–10 (1999–2000): 46–62.

476 Bibliography Gelsinger, Bruce E. “A Thirteenth-Century Norwegian-Castilian Alliance.” Medievalia et Humanistica: New Series 10 (1981): 55–80. Giménez Soler, Andrés. Don Juan Manuel: Biografía y estudio crítico. Zaragoza: Tip. La Académica de F. Martínez, 1932. Girona y Llagustera, Daniel. “Mullerament de l’Infant En Pere de Cathalunya ab Madona Constança de Sicilia.” In Congrès d’Historia de la Corona d’Aragó, 1.232–99. Barcelona: Stampa d’En F. Altés, 1909. Glick, Thomas F. Irrigation and Society in Medieval Valencia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970. Glick, Thomas F. Paisajes de la conquista: Cambio cultural y geográfico en la España medieval. Valencia: Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2007. Glover, Melville. “L’Abbaye du Betton en Maurienne.” Mémoires de l’Académie Royale de Savoie 2.3 (1859): 315–56. Gómez Moreno, Manuel. El panteón real de las Huelgas de Burgos. Madrid: CSIC, Instituto Diego Velázquez, 1946. Gómez Moreno, Manuel. “La crónica de la población de Ávila: Antecedentes.” Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 113.1 (July-August 1943): 11–56. González, Julio. Reinado y diplomas de Fernando III. 3 vols. Córdoba: Monte de Piedad y Caja de Ahorros, 1983–86. González Arce, José Damián. “La política fiscal de Alfonso X en el reino de Murcia: Portazgo y diezmos.” Studia Historica: Historia Medieval 10 (1992): 73–100. González Hurtebise, Eduardo. Libros de tesoreria de la casa real de Aragón. Barcelona: Tipografía Luis Beniges, 1911. González Jiménez, Manuel. “Alfonso X and His Brothers: A Story of Not Very Fraternal Relations.” In The Emergence of León-Castilla c. 1065–1500: Essays Presented to J.F. O’Callaghan, edited by James J. Todesca, 69–80. Burlington: Ashgate, 2015. González Jiménez, Manuel. Alfonso X el Sabio. Barcelona: Ariel, 2004. González Jiménez, Manuel. “Alfonso X y sus hermanos (1).” Boletín de la Real Academia Sevillana de Buenas Letras 32 (2004): 203–14. González Jiménez, Manuel. “Cortes de Sevilla de 1261.” Historia, Instituciones, Documentos (Universidad de Sevilla) 25 (1998): 295–311. González Jiménez, Manuel. “El Infante Don Fernando de La Cerda: Biografía e itinerario.” In Literatura y cristiandad: Homenaje al profesor Jesús Montoya Martínez, edited by Antonio Rubio Flores, María Luisa Dañobeitia Fernández, and Manuel José Alonso García, 531–56. Granada: Universidad de Granada, 2001. González Jiménez, Manuel. La repoblación del reino de Sevilla en el siglo XIII. Granada: Universidades de Granada y Sevilla, 2008. González Jiménez, Manuel. “Las relaciones entre Portugal y Castilla durante el siglo XIII.” Revista da Faculdade de Letras: Historia 15.1 (1998): 1–24.



Bibliography 477

González Jiménez, Manuel. “Repartimientos andaluces del siglo XIII: Perspectiva de conjunto y problemas.” Historia, Instituciones, Documentos (Universidad de Sevilla) 14 (1987): 103–22. González Jiménez, Manuel. “Sancho IV, infante.” Historia, Instituciones, Documentos (Universidad de Sevilla) 28 (2001): 151–216. González Palencia, Ángel. Los mozárabes de Toledo en los siglos XII y XIII. 4 vols. Madrid: Instituto de Valencia de Don Juan, 1926–30. Goñi Gaztambide, José. Historia de la bula de la cruzada en España. Vitoria: Editorial del Seminario, 1958. Guerrero Ventas, Pedro. La archidiócesis de Toledo y su piedad popular. Toledo: Instituto Teológico San Ildefonso, 2004. Gutiérrez Baños, Fernando. “El sepulcro de la infante doña Leonor, hija de Alfonso X el Sabio, en el Real Monasterio de Santo Domingo de Caleruega (Burgos).” Quintana: Revista de estudios do Departamento de Historia da Arte 13 (2014): 185–97. Harvey, Ruth E. “The Empress Eudoxia and the Troubadours.” Medium Aevum 70.2 (2001): 268–77. Hecht, Winfried. “Zur Geschichte der ‘Kaiserin’ von Montpellier, Eudoxia Komnena.” Revue des Études Byzantines 26 (1968): 161–9. Hernández, Francisco Javier. “Alfonso X in Andalucía.” Historia, Instituciones, Documentos (Universidad de Sevilla) 22 (1995): 293–306. Hernández, Francisco Javier. “La formación intelectual del primer arzobispo de Sevilla.” In Sevilla 1248: Congreso internacional conmemorativo del 750° aniversario de la Conquista de la Ciudad de Sevilla por Fernando III, Rey de Castilla y León, edited by M. González Jiménez, 607–20. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Ramón Areces, 2000. Hernández, Francisco Javier. “La reina Violante de Aragón, Jofré de Loaysa y la Crónica de Alfonso X: Un gran fragmento cronístico del siglo XIII reutilizado en el XIV.” Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies 7.1 (2015): 87–111. Hernández, Francisco Javier. “Relaciones de Alfonso X con Inglaterra y Francia.” Alcanate 4 (2004–2005): 167–242. Hernández, Francisco Javier. “Two Weddings and a Funeral: Alfonso X’s Monuments in Burgos.” Hispanic Research Journal 13.5 (October 2012): 407–33. Hernández Serna, Joaquín. “La Cantiga CCCLXXXII de Alfonso el Sabio.” Murcia 3.9 (1977): n.p. [14 pp.]. Hinojosa Montalvo, José. “La función comercial en Elche durante los siglos bajomedievales.” Anales de la Universidad de Alicante (Departamento de Historia Medieval) 13 (2000–2002): 6–112. Hinojosa Montalvo, José. “Privilegios reales a mudéjares y judíos.” In Los cimientos del estado en la Edad Media, edited by Juan Antonio Barrio Barrio,

478 Bibliography 279–307. Alcoy: Marfil/Universidad de Alicante, Departamento de Historia Medieval, Historia Moderna y Ciencias y Técnicas Historiográficas, 2004. Historia de Villena hasta el siglo XVII. Part 1: José Fernández Domene Verdú. “El agua y su utilización para el riego en la Huerta de Villena,” 17–301. Part 2: Aurelio Pretel Marín. “Villena en la frontera medieval de Aragón y Castilla y en el señorío medieval de su nombre,” 305–58. Villena: Comunidad de Regantes de la Huerta y Partidas, 2009. Ibarra y Ruiz, Pedro. Estudio acerca de la institución del riego de Elche. Madrid: Jaime Ratés, 1914. Ibarra y Ruiz, Pedro. Historia de Elche. Alicante: Vicente Botella, 1895. Iglesia Ferreirós, Aquilino. “Las Cortes de Zamora de 1274 y los casos de corte.” Anuario de Historia del Derecho español 41 (1971): 945–71. Inclán Inclán, Regino. “Sepulcro del infante don Felipe, hijo del rey Fernando III el Santo.” Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 75 (1919): 143–84. Karge, Henrik. Die Kathedrale von Burgos und die spanische Architektur des 13. Jahrhunderts. Berlín: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1989. Keller, John E., and Richard P. Kinkade. “Iconography and Literature: Alfonso Himself in Cantiga 209.” Hispania 66 (1983): 348–52. Kinkade, Richard P. “Alfonso X, Cantiga 235, and the Events of 1269–1278.” Speculum 67.2 (1992): 284–323. Kinkade, Richard P. “A Royal Scandal and the Rebellion of 1255.” In Studies in Honor of Bruno M. Damiani, edited by Filippo M. Toscano, 185–98. Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1994. Kinkade, Richard P. “Beatrice ‘Contesson’ of Savoy (c. 1250–1290): The Mother of Juan Manuel.” La corónica 32.3 (Summer, 2004): 163–225. Kinkade, Richard P. “Don Juan Manuel’s Father, Infante Manuel, in the Cantigas de Santa Maria.” Bulletin of the Cantigueiros de Santa Maria 8 (1996): 59–75. Kinkade, Richard P. “Violante de Aragón (1236?–1300?): An Historical Overview.” Exemplaria Hispánica 2 (1992–93): 1–37. Kinkade, Richard P., and John E. Keller. “An Orphaned Miniature of Cantiga 235 from the Florentine Codex.” Bulletin of the Cantigueiros de Santa Maria 10 (1998): 27–50. Labande, Edmond René. “‘Ad limina’: Le pèlerin médiéval au terme de sa démarche.” In Mélange offerts à René Crozet, edited by P. Gallais and Y.-J. Riou, 1.283–91. Poitiers: Société d’Études Médiévales, 1966. Labayru y Goicoechea, Estanislao Jaime de. Historia general del señorío de Bizcaya. 6 vols. Bilbao: “La Propaganda,” 1895–1903. Ladero Quesada, Miguel Angel. “Las reformas fiscales y monetarias de Alfonso X como base del ‘Estado Moderno.’” In Alfonso X: Aportaciones de un rey castellano a la construcción de Europa, edited by Miguel Rodríguez Llopis et al., 31–54. Murcia: Editora Regional, 1997.



Bibliography 479

Lafont Mateo, Germán. Pampliega, Torrespadierne y Santiuste: Mil años de historia: Siglos VII al XVII. n.p. [Salamanca:] Kadmos, n.d. [2010?]. Langlois, Charles-Victor. Le règne de Philippe III le Hardi. Paris: Hachette, 1887. Linehan, Peter. History and the Historians of Medieval Spain. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1993. Linehan, Peter. Spain, 1157–1300: A Partible Inheritance. Oxford: Blackwell, 2008. Linehan, Peter. The Spanish Church and the Papacy in the Thirteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1971. Lloyd, Vera. A Village Pedigree: Cockfield in Suffolk. Cockfield: V. Lloyd, 2004. Locatelli, René, Denis Brun, and Henri Dubois. Les salines de Salins au XIIIème siècle: Cartulaires et livre des rentiers. Paris: Annales Littéraires de l’Université de Besançon, 1991. Lomax, Derek W. “El padre de don Juan Manuel.” In Don Juan Manuel: VII Centenario, 163–76. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1982. Lomax, Derek W. La Orden de Santiago, 1170–1275. Madrid: CSIC/Escuela de Estudios Medievales, 1965. Lomax, Derek W. “Una crónica inédita de Silos.” In Homenaje a Fray Justo Pérez de Urbel, 1.323–37. Burgos: Abadía de Silos, 1976–77. Loperráez Corvalán, Juan. Descripción histórica del Obispado de Osma. 3 vols. Madrid: Imprenta Real, 1788. López Fernández, Manuel. Pelay Pérez Correa: Historia y leyenda de un maestre santiaguista. Badajoz: Diputación de Badajoz, 2010. López Ferreiro, Antonio, ed. Fueros municipales de Santiago y de su tierra. 2 vols. Santiago: Imp. y Enc. del Seminario Conciliar Central, 1895–96. López Ferreiro, Antonio. Historia de la Santa A.M. Iglesia de Santiago de Compostela. 11 vols. Santiago: Impr. y Esc. del Seminario Conciliar Central, 1898–1909. López Serrano, Aniceto. “Primer Fuero concedido a Yecla por el Infante don Manuel, hermano de Alfonso X.” Yakka: Revista de Estudios Yeclanos 5 (1994): 77–90. Lugon, Clovis. Saint Guérin, abbé d’Aulps, évêque de Sion: “Un homme et une province”: Romandie-Savoie au XIIe siècle. Genève: Perret-Gentil, 1970. Luongo, Salvatore. “Didáctica, alegoría política y autobiografía: Una nueva lectura del ejemplo XXXIII de El Conde Lucanor.” e-Spania, 21 June 2015, http://e-spania.revues.org. MacDonald, Robert A. “Alfonso the Learned and Succession: A Father’s Dilemma.” Speculum 40 (1965): 647–53. MacDonald, Robert A. Leyes de los Adelantados Mayores: Regulations, Attributed to Alfonso X of Castile, Concerning the King’s Vicar in the Judiciary and in Territorial Administration. Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 2000. Magdalino, Paul. The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos, 1143–1180. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1993.

480 Bibliography Malalana Ureña, Antonio. Escalona medieval (1083–1400). Madrid: Almudaina, 1987. Malalana Ureña, Antonio. La villa de Escalona y su tierra a finales de la Edad Media. Madrid: Fundación Sánchez Cabezudo, Gráficas Guemo, 2002. Manrique, Cayetano. “Treguas y juicio de Dios.” Revista de España 5 (1868): 291–301. Mansilla Reoyo, Demetrio. Iglesia castellano-leonesa y curia romana en los tiempos del Rey San Fernando: Estudio documental sacado de los registros vaticanos. Madrid: CSIC, Instituto Francisco Suárez de Teología, 1945. Marca, Pierre de. Histoire de Béarn. Paris: La Veuve Jean Camusat, 1640. Marcos Pous, Alejandro. “Los dos matrimonios de Sancho IV de Castilla.” Italica: Cuadernos de Trabajos de la Escuela Española de Historia y Arqueología en Roma 8 (1956): 7–108. Marsh, Frank B. English Rule in Gascony. Ann Arbor: G. Wahr, 1912. Martin, Georges. “Alphonse X maudit son fils.” Atalaya: Review Française d’Études Médiévales Hispaniques 5 (1994): 151–79. Martin, Henri. Histoire de France. 17 vols. 4th ed. Paris, 1857–60. Martín Cantarino, Carlos. “El acequia que don Manuel mandó facer. La importancia del conocimiento histórico para la comprensión y gestión del ‘Sistema de Zonas Húmedas del Sur de Alicante.” In Irrigation, Society, Landscape: Tribute to Thomas F. Glick, edited by C. Sanchis-Ibor et al., 254–73. València: Universitat Politècnica de València, 2014. Martínez, H. Salvador. Alfonso X, el Sabio: Una biografía. Madrid: Ediciones Polifemo, 2003. Martínez Caviró, Balbina. “El llamado palacio de Oñate en Toledo y sus sucesivos propietarios.” Anales de la Real Academia Matritense de Heráldica y Genealogía 8.1 (2004): 299–316. Martínez Sopena, Pascual. La Tierra de Campos occidental: Poblamiento, poder y comunidad del siglo X al XIII. Valladolid: Institución Cultural Simancas, 1985. Mateu y Llopis, Felipe. Glosario hispánico de numismática. Barcelona: CSIC, 1946. Menéndez Pidal, Juan. Sellos españoles de la Edad Media. Madrid: Tip. de la Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos, 1921. Menéndez Pidal, Ramón. Documentos lingüísticos de España. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Históricos, 1919. Menéndez Pidal, Ramón. Orígenes del español. 4th ed. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1956. Millán Abad, Miguel Angel. Historia de Coyanza (Valencia de Don Juan). 3 vols. León: Gráficas León, 1998. Miret i Sans, Joaquim. Itinerari de Jaume I “El Conqueridor.” Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans, 1918. Molinier, Auguste. “Trahison du vicomte de Narbonne, Aymeri (1276–1284).” In Histoire générale de Languedoc avec note et pièces justificatives ... Édition de dissertations & notes nouvelles, 10.409–24. Toulouse: Privat, 1885.



Bibliography 481

Mondéjar, Gaspar Ibáñez de Segovia Peralta y Mendoza, Marqués de. Memorias históricas del Rei D. Alonso el Sabio. Madrid: Joachin Ibarra, 1777. Moret, Joseph de. Annales de Navarra. Vol. 3. Pamplona: Fernando Zepeda, 1704. Moxó Montoliu, Francisco. “El enlace de Alfonso de Castilla con Violante de Aragón: Marco político y precisiones cronológicas.” Hispania: Revista Española de Historia 49.171 (1989): 69–110. Mugnier, François. “Communication sur deux chartes relatives au deuxième mariage d’Amédée IV et sur d’autres documents, publiés dans les Layettes du Trésor des Chartes.” Mémoires et Documents de la Société Savoisienne d’Histoire et d’Archéologie 32 (1893): lxxxviii–xcviii. Muntaner, Ramon. Crónica catalana de Ramón Muntaner: Texto original y traducción castellana. Edited by Antonio de Bofarull. Barcelona: Jaime Jepús, 1860. Nieto Soria, José Manuel. “Algunas consideraciones sobre el patronato castellano-leonés en los siglos XIII y XIV.” Anuario de Estudios Medievales 15 (1985): 203–28. Nunes, José Joaquim. Cantigas d’amigo dos trovadores galegos-portugueses. 3 vols. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade, 1926–28; rpt. Lisboa: Centro do Livro Brasileiro, 1973. Obregón Retortillo, Juan Ruiz de. “Alfonso X El emplazado.” Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos 32 (1916): 420–49. O’Callaghan, Joseph F. A History of Medieval Spain. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1975. O’Callaghan, Joseph F. Alfonso X and the Cantigas de Santa María: A Poetic Biography. Leiden: Brill, 1998. O’Callaghan, Joseph F. Cortes of Castile-León, 1188–1350. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989. O’Callaghan, Joseph F. The Gibraltar Crusade: Castile and the Battle for the Strait. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011. O’Callaghan, Joseph F. The Learned King: The Reign of Alfonso X of Castile. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993. Ortuño Sánchez-Pedreño, José María. El adelantado de la corona de Castilla. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, 1997. Otto, Heinrich. “Alexander IV. und der deutsche Thronstreit.” Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung 19 (1898): 75–91. Palacios Martín, Bonifacio. “Los símbolos de la soberanía en la edad media española: El simbolismo de la espada.” Edited by Manuel Espadas Burgos. In VII Centenario del Infante don Fernando de la Cerda: Jornadas de Estudio: Ciudad Real. Abril, 1975, 273–96. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios Manchegos, 1976. Paravicini Bagliani, Agostino. La cour des papes au XIIIe siècle. Paris: Hachette, 1995. Pardo Rodríguez, María Luisa. La cancillería de don Fernando de la Cerda. León: Universidad de León, 2009.

482 Bibliography Paredes, Juan. “Las cantigas de escarnio y las genealogías peninsulares: Notas sobre algunos personajes del cancionero alfonsí.” Revista de Filología Románica 27 (2010): 131–42. Peiró Mateos, María del Carmen. El comercio y los comerciantes en la Murcia de finales de la Edad Media a través de la documentación. Doctoral dissertation, Universidad de Murcia, 1999. Digitum, Biblioteca Universitaria, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/10201/66. Pellicer, José de Ossau y Tovar. Informe del origen, antigüedad, calidad, i sucession de la excelentissima Casa de Sarmiento de Villamayor. Madrid: s.n., 1663. Peters, Edward M. “Rex inutilis: Sancho II of Portugal and Thirteenth-Century Deposition Theory.” Studia Gratiana 14 (1967): 255–305. Petit, Ernest. L’Histoire des ducs de Bourgogne de la race Capétienne avec des documents inédits et des pièces justificatives. 9 vols. Dijon: Impr. Darantiere, 1885–1905. Phillips, William D., Jr. Slavery in Medieval and Early Modern Iberia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014. Poema de mio Cid. Edited by Ian Michael. 3rd ed. Madrid: Castalia, 1985. Pons Boigues, Francisco. Apuntes sobre las escrituras mozárabes toledanas que se conservan en el Archivo Histórico Nacional. Madrid: Viuda e Hijos de Tello, 1897. Poveda Navarro, Antonio Manuel. “Aproximación a la demografía bajomedieval de la comarca del medio Vinalopó (Alicante).” Anales de la Universidad de Alicante 6 (1987): 31–48. Poveda Navarro, Antonio Manuel. “Villa et castiello de Ella (Elda, Alicante) en el siglo XIII.” Anales de la Universidad de Alicante 4–5 (1986): 67–98. Powicke, Frederick Maurice. The Thirteenth Century, 1216–1307. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1991. Presilla, Maricel E. “The Image of Death and Political Ideology in the Cantigas de Santa Maria.” In Studies on the Cantigas de Santa Maria: Art, Music, and Poetry. Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Cantigas de Santa Maria, New York, 1981. Edited by Israel J. Katz and John E. Keller, 402–57. Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1987. Prestwich, Michael. Edward I. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988. Pretel Marín, Aurelio. Almansa medieval: Una villa del señorío de Villena en los siglos XIII, XIV y XV. Almansa: Ayuntamiento de Almansa, 1981. Pretel Marín, Aurelio. Conquista y primeros intentos de repoblación del territorio albacetense (Del período islámico a la crisis del siglo XIII). Albacete: Instituto de Estudios Albacetenses, 1986. Pretel Marín, Aurelio. “En torno al concepto y límites de un topónimo olvidado: La Mancha de Montaragón.” In Actas del Congreso de Historia de Albacete, 8–13 diciembre de 1983, 2.263–71. Albacete: Instituto de Estudios Albacetenses/Diputación Provincial, 1984. Pretel Marín, Aurelio. “Entre el cuento y la historia: Origen del Estado colchón de don Manuel en la frontera de Aragón y Castilla.” In La frontera que une:



Bibliography 483

1244–2019. Congreso 775 aniversario de la frontera entre los reinos de Valencia y Murcia. Almansa, Elda, Villena y El Camp de Mirra, 8–10 February 2019, 1–48. Alicante: Instituto Alicantino de Cultura “Juan Gil Albert,” in press. Pretel Marín, Aurelio. “Las armas de los Manuel en la heráldica municipal de la Provincia de Albacete.” Al-Basit: Revista de Estudios Albacetenses, 2nd Época, 7.11 (December 1982): 5–26. Pretel Marín, Aurelio. “Villena en la frontera medieval de Aragón y Castilla y en el señorío medieval de su nombre.” Part 2. In Historia de Villena hasta el siglo XVII, 305–58. Villena: Comunidad de Regantes de la Huerta y Partidas, 2009. Pretel Marín, Aurelio, and Miguel Rodríguez Llopis. El Señorío de Villena en el siglo XIV. Albacete: Instituto de Estudios Albacetenses “Don Juan Manuel,” 1998. Procter, Evelyn S. Alfonso X of Castile: Patron of Literature and Learning. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951. Procter, Evelyn S. Curia and Cortes in León and Castile 1072–1295. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1980. Quadrado, José María, and Vicente de la Fuente. España: Sus monumentos y artes, ... Castilla la Nueva. Vol. 2. Barcelona: Daniel Cortezo, 1886. Ribera, Manuel Mariano. Centuria primera del real y militar instituto de la ínclita religión de Nuestra Señora de la Merced. Part 1. Barcelona: Pablo Campins, 1726. Riera i Melis, Antonio. “La delimitació del sector meridional de la frontera entre la Corona Catalanoaragonesa i el Regne de Castella (1151–1305).” Acta Historica et Archaeologica Mediaevalia 25 (2003–2004): 73–93. Ripart, Laurent. “L’Anneau de Saint Maurice.” In Héraldique et emblématique de la Maison de Savoie (XIe–XVIe s.), edited by Bernard Andenmatten, Agostino Paravicini Bagliani, and Annick Vadon, 45–91. Lausanne: Fondation Humbert II et Marie José de Savoie/Cahiers Lausannois d’Histoire Médiévale, 1994. Rivera Garretas, Milagros. La encomienda, el priorato y la villa de Uclés en la Edad Media (1174–1310): Formación de un señorío de la Orden de Santiago. Madrid: CSIC, 1985. Rivera Recio, Juan Francisco. Los arzobispos de Toledo en la baja Edad Media (s. XII–XV). Toledo: Diputación Provincial de Toledo, 1969. Rodríguez Gil, Magdalena. “Para un estudio de la sentencia de deposición de Alfonso X.” Revista de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Complutense. Número extraordinario 9 dedicado a Alfonso X el Sabio: VII Centenario (1985): 103–13. Romano, David. Judíos al servicio de Pedro el Grande de Aragón (1276–1285). Barcelona: Universidad de Barcelona, Facultad de Filología, 1983. Rubio García, Luis. “La infanta Doña Constanza.” Murgetana 100 (1999): 105–11. Ruiz, Teófilo F. “Una nota sobre la estructura y relaciones fiscales del Burgos bajomedieval.” En la España Medieval 3 (1982): 387–97.

484 Bibliography Sagarra, Fernando de. “Noticias y documentos inéditos referentes al infante Don Alfonso, primogénito de Don Jaime y de Doña Leonor de Castilla.” Boletín de la Real Academia de Buenas Letras de Barcelona 19 (1917): 285–301. Salmerón, Pasqual. La antigua Carteia, o Carcesa, hoy Cieza, villa del Reyno de Murcia. Madrid: Joaquín Ibarra, 1777. Sánchez, Galo. “Para la redacción del antiguo derecho territorial castellano.” Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español 6 (1929): 260–328. Sánchez Albornoz, Claudio. “Algunos documentos procesales del reino de León y Castilla de 1050 a 1300.” Revista Portuguesa de Historia 16 (1976): 1–21. Sánchez Albornoz, Claudio. Viejos y nuevos estudios sobre las instituciones medievales españolas. 3 vols. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, 1976–79. Sardina, Patrizia. “Corrado Lancia.” Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, 63 (2004), http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/corrado-lancia_(Dizionario -Biografico)/. Schadek, Hans. “Tunis oder Sizilien? Die Ziele der aragonischen Mittelmeerpolitik unter Peter III. von Aragon.” Spanische Forschungen der Görresgesellschaft 1. Reihe, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Kulturgeschichte Spaniens 28 (1975): 335–49. Schoen, Wilhelm Freiherr von. Alfonso X de Castilla. Madrid: Ediciones Rialp, 1966. Serrano, Luciano. “El ayo de Alfonso el Sabio.” Boletín de la Real Academia Española 7 (1920): 571–602. Serrano, Luciano. “El canciller de Fernando III de Castilla.” Hispania: Revista Española de Historia 1 (1941): 3–40. Serrano, Luciano. “El mayordomo mayor de Doña Berenguela.” Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 104 (1934): 101–98. Serrano, Luciano. Fuentes para la historia de Castilla. 2 vols. Madrid: Gregorio del Amo, 1907. Serra Ruiz, Rafael. “La Orden de San Juan de Jerusalén en el reino de Murcia (siglo XIII).” Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español 38 (1968): 553–90. Sibilia, Salvatore. Alessandro IV (1254–1261). Anagni: Cassa Rurale ed Artigiana di Anagni, 1961. Snellgrove, Harold Sinclair. The Lusignans in England, 1247–1258. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1950. Soldevila, Ferran, ed. Les quatre grans cròniques. Barcelona: Selecta, 1971. Soldevila, Ferran. Pere el Gran. I: L’Infant; II: El regnat fins a l’any 1282. 2nd ed. Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans, 1995. Soler García, José María. “Del Archivo villenense: Un registro de escrituras realizado en 1593.” In Congreso de Historia del Señorío de Villena (Albacete 23–26 octubre 1986), 394–405. Albacete: Instituto de Estudios Albacetenses, Diputación Provincial, 1987. Tanner, Thomas, Bishop of St. Asaph. The Tanner Manuscripts. Edited by Michael Hawkins. Hassocks, England: Harvester Press, 1877–1980.



Bibliography 485

Tasso, Torquato. Gerusalemme liberata. Edited by Lanfranco Caretti. Bari: Laterza, 1961. Tilander, Gunnar, ed. Vidal mayor: Traducción aragonesa de la obra ‘In excelsis Dei thesauris’ de Vidal de Canellas. 3 vols. Lund: Legas Hispanicae Medii Aevi, 1956. Torres Fontes, Juan. “El adelantamiento mayor del reino de Murcia en la crisis castellana de 1282–1284.” Estudios sobre Patrimonio, Cultura y Ciencia Medievales (Cádiz) 3–4 (2001–2002): 227–35. Torres Fontes, Juan. El señorío de Abanilla. 2nd ed. Murcia: Diputación Provincial de Murcia, 1982. Torres Fontes, Juan. “El testamento del infante don Manuel (1283).” Miscelánea Medieval Murciana 7 (1981): 11–21. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Historicidad de la Cantiga CCCLXXXII.” In Literatura y cristiandad: Homenaje al profesor Jesús Montoya Martínez, edited by M.J. Alonso García, M.L., 351–62. Dañobeitia Fernández, and A.R. Rubio Flores. Granada: Universidad de Granada, 2001. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Jaime I y Alfonso X: Dos criterios de repoblación.” In VII Congreso de Historia de la Corona de Aragón, 2.329–40. Barcelona: Vda. de F. Rodríguez Ferrán, 1962. Torres Fontes, Juan. “La descendencia del infante Don Manuel y el señorío de Pinilla.” Revista Murgetana 109 (2003): 9–18. Torres Fontes, Juan. La reconquista de Murcia en 1266 por Jaime I de Aragón. Murcia: CSIC/Diputación de Murcia, 1967. Torres Fontes, Juan. “La repoblación murciana en el siglo XIII.” Revista Murgetana 20 (1963): 5–21. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Las ordenaciones al almotacén murciano en la primera mitad del siglo XIV.” Miscelanea Medieval Murciana 10 (1983): 71–131. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Las salinas de San Pedro del Pinatar.” Revista Murgetana 16 (1961): 59–65. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Medidas de superficie y de valoración en el Repartimiento de Murcia.” Revista Murgetana 12 (1959): 63–77. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Nicolás Pérez, alcaide de Alicante.” Revista Murgetana 22 (1964): 121–9. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Relación murciana de los López de Ayala en los siglos XIII y XIV.” Revista Murgetana 45 (1976): 5–35. Torres Fontes, Juan. Repartimiento de la Huerta y Campo de Murcia en el s. XIII. Murcia: CSIC/Patronato “José María Quadrado”/Academia Alfonso X el Sabio, 1971. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Última fase del repartimiento de la Huerta de Murcia (1286–1331).” Miscelánea Medieval Murciana 23–4 (1999–2000): 141–54. Torres Fontes, Juan. “Un médico alfonsí: Maestre Nicolás.” Revista Murgetana 6 (1954): 9–16.

486 Bibliography Tourtoulon, Charles de. Jacme Ier le Conquérant, roi d’Aragon, comte de Barcelone, seigneur de Montpellier. 2 vols. Montpellier: Imprimerie Gras, 1863–67. Utrilla Utrilla, Juan F. “Los Maza de Huesca: Un linaje aristocrático aragonés en el siglo XII.” Aragón en la Edad Media 20 (2008): 811–27. Vajay, Szabolcs de. “Eudoquía Cómnena, abuela bizantina de Jaime el Conquistador.” In Jaime I y su época. X Congreso de Historia de la Corona de Aragón, edited by Charles Emmanuel Dufourcq, 2.611–31. Zaragoza: Institución Fernando el Católico, 1979–1980. Vázquez Campos, Braulio. “A los grandes debe poner en los grandes oficios: Nobleza, administración y política en el reinado de Alfonso X.” Alcanate 9 (2014–15): 211–59. Vázquez Campos, Braulio. “Sobre los orígenes del adelantamiento de Andalucía.” Historia, Instituciones, Documentos (Universidad de Sevilla) 27 (2000): 333–73. Verlinden, Charles. L’esclavage dans l’Europe médiévale. Vol. 1: Péninsule ibérique – France. Bruges: De Tempel, 1955. Víñez Sánchez, Antonia. El trovador Gonçal’Eanes Dovinhal: Estudio histórico y edición. Verba. Anuario Galego de Filoloxía, Anexo 55. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 2004. Wilshire, Leland Edward. Boniface of Savoy: Carthusian and Archbishop of Canterbury, 1207–1270. Analecta Cartusiana, 31. Salzburg: Institut für Englische Sprache und Literatur, Universität Salzburg, 1977. Wurstemberger, Johann Ludwig. Peter der Zweite, Graf von Savoyen, Markgraf in Italien, sein Haus und seine Lande: Ein Charakterbild des dreizehnten Jahrhunderts. 4 vols. Bern: Stämpflische Verlagshandlung, 1856–58. Yanguas y Miranda, José. Diccionario de antigüedades del reino de Navarra. 3 vols. Pamplona: José Imaz y Gadea, 1840

Index

Abanilla, 112, 227, 229, 230 Abaqa Khan, 128 abbot of Castrogeriz, 25 abbot of San Gerin, 269, 270, 273 abbot of Valladolid, 25, 154 Abdallah b. Abdelaisar de Iznatoraf (Infante Manuel’s slave), 116 Abegg, Regine, 361, 412 Aben Hamete, 248 Aben Hualit Aben Haben Catif (Infante Manuel’s Muslim magistrate in Elche), 233 Aben Yahyel, 118, 119 Abu Yusuf (Marinid emir of Morocco), 99, 148–149, 166, 171, 190, 201, 204, 235, 249, 250, 252, 253, 289, 293 Acequia de Daliof, 38, 279 Acequia de Don Manuel, 41, 284 Acero y Abad, Nicolás, 372 Adam de Cocfeud, 83 Ademuz, 128 Adrian V, 85, 196 Afonso Eanes do Cotom, 416–417 African crusade, 55, 56, 58–59, 64, 82, 281, 282, 395 Agapito y Revilla, Juan, 454 Agost, 38, 278 Ágreda, 89, 225, 227, 234, 254, 292, 394, 438, 443

Aguado de Córdova, Francisco, 395, 413 Aguas, 38, 278 Agustí y Casanovas, Jacinto, 435 Agustín, bishop of Osma, 204 Agustín Pérez, 194, 288 Aixa (daughter of Kásim b. Chobair de Murcia, Infante Manuel’s slave), 116 Al-Azraq, 41, 56, 57, 279 Al-Malik al Kamil, sultan of Egypt, 8 Alacaz, 34 Alarcón, 37, 92, 304 Albacete, 36, 244, 399 Albaida, 33, 221, 368 Albarracín, 79, 209 Albatana, 38 Alberche River, 234 Albertus Magnus, 25, 389 Alboaquez, Abu Bakr al-Watiq, king of Murcia (son of Ibn Hud), 96, 113, 399 Albufera de Murcia, 40, 41, 145, 252, 267, 373, 404, 410 Alcalá, 37 Alcalá de Benzayde, 102–103, 139, 218, 291 Alcalá de Guadaira, 33, 362 Alcalá de Henares, 94, 171, 193

488 Index Alcantarilla, 37–38, 252, 278, 279 Alcaraz, 98–99, 106, 107, 108, 129, 136, 147, 371, 402, 406, 411 Alcaudete, 38, 455 Aldonça, tenant of Don Ladrón, 142 Aldonza Alfonso (illegitimate daughter of Alfonso IX, half-sister of Fernando III), 15 Aledo, 37, 59, 281 Alexander II, king of Scotland, 83 Alexander IV, 61, 62, 64, 72, 75, 77, 78, 79, 81, 83–84, 86, 87, 195, 284, 303, 365, 380, 383, 384, 387, 389 Alexios I Komnenos, 356 Alexios II (son of Manuel I Komnenos), 7, 357 Alexios III, 7 Alexios IV (son of Isaac II Angelos), 7 Alfaba, 142 Alfarella, 142–143 Alférez, 66–67 Alfonso (son of Infante Manuel), 110–111, 122, 125, 145–146, 166, 187, 189, 263, 281, 283, 284, 285, 287 Alfonso (son of Infante Fernando de la Cerda), 29, 221, 291 Alfonso de la Cerda, 192, 198, 249 Alfonso de Molina, Infante (brother of Fernando III, Infante Manuel’s uncle), 18, 20, 21, 31, 74, 106–107, 157, 246, 354, 367, 394, 398 Alfonso Fernández el Niño (illegitimate son of Alfonso X), 204, 212, 220, 231, 289, 335, 407 Alfonso García de Villamayor, 4, 14, 17, 20, 30, 32, 46, 69, 70, 91, 96, 97, 98, 99, 108–110, 118, 120, 137, 145, 260, 274, 278, 282, 283, 367, 379, 381, 452 Alfonso II of Provence, 175 Alfonso III, king of Aragón, 230, 260 Alfonso III, king of Portugal, 32, 82, 98, 120, 216, 431

Alfonso, Infante (son of Alfonso III), 262, 281, 283 Alfonso, Infante (son of Jaime I), 39–40, 78, 111, 180, 286, 423 Alfonso, Infante (son of Pedro III), 226, 227 Alfonso IX, king of León, 11–12, 15, 18, 20, 32 Alfonso López de Haro, 17 Alfonso Martínez, 453 Alfonso Pérez (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 323, 325 Alfonso Rodríguez Tello, 269 Alfonso Téllez de Meneses, 17–18, 30 Alfonso V, king of Aragón, 298 Alfonso VII, king of Castile, 161, 402 Alfonso VIII, king of Castile, 11, 39, 279 Alfonso XI, king of Castile, 5, 10, 11, 47, 67, 114, 195, 230, 274, 295, 296, 427 Algaba, 23 Algarve, 32, 98, 120, 122, 243, 247–248 Algeciras, 148, 171, 207, 208, 209, 210, 212, 213, 214, 219, 220, 229, 249, 253, 290, 291, 434 Algorfa, 115 Alguasta, 117, 267 Alguazas, 122, 229, 437 Alhama, 18, 37, 108, 260, 402 Alhofra, 36, 117 Aliada, 117, 437 Alicante, 37, 38, 58, 59, 66, 101, 102, 104, 105, 107, 112, 117, 127, 133, 136, 137, 159, 163, 200, 209, 244, 249, 265, 272, 278, 281, 312, 327, 328, 371, 381 Alix of Merano, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 425 Aljarafe, 33 Aljuçer, 117, 119 Almagro, 153



Index 489

Almansa, 37, 95, 97, 98, 101, 129, 199, 200, 203, 226, 238, 244–245, 293, 325, 340 Almería, 453 Almogavars, 36, 106, 107 Almoradí, 40–41 Almotacén, 445 Almuztad, 38, 279 Alonso García, bishop of Palencia, 150 Alonso García, Manuel José, 468 Alonso Getino, Luis G., 366 Alpechín, 23 Alpera, 58, 229 Alvar Díaz de Asturias (son of Ordoño Alvarez de Asturias), 18, 19, 155 Alvar Díaz de Ferrera, 269–270 Alvar Martínez, 159 Alvar Núñez de Lara, 252 Alvar Núñez Osorio, conde de Trastámara, 427 Alvar Pérez de Castro, lord of Paredes de Nava, 4, 17 Álvarez Borge, Ignacio, 442 Alvaro López de Haro, 30 Alvaro Ruiz (Fernando III’s merino mayor), 299 Alzira, 220, 238, 335, 336, 340, 398 Amadeo I, king of Spain, 298 Amadeus IV of Savoy, 174, 175, 176, 178, 181, 185, 190, 229, 285–286, 297, 298 Amadeus V of Savoy, 184, 185 Amata (wife of Gaston VII, viscount of Béarn), 110 Amauri (brother of Aymeri IV), 419 Anagni, 62, 72, 74–75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 282, 380, 386, 387, 389, 394 Andras II, king of Hungary, 424 Andreas de Ferentino, 79, 87 Andreo Dodana, 141, 402

Andrés de Procida (vassal of Pedro III), 232 Andrés Fernández (pertiguero de Santiago), 12 Andrés Pérez (royal scribe of Alfonso X), 267 Andronikos I Komnenos, 7 Angoulême, 198, 203, 390 Annales Placentini Gibellini, 135, 365, 417, 420, 425 Anne Marguerite of Burgundy, 174 Antequera, 93, 115 Aparicio Guillén (tax collector of Castile), 207 aranzada, 12 Arauzo de Miel, 14 Arcas, 58 archdeacon of Treviño, 80 Archidona, 93, 115 Archivo Municipal de Burgos, 354, 436, 439 Archivo Municipal de Palencia, 356 Arco y Garay, Ricardo del, 265 Arcos, 24, 25, 100 Arévalo, 65, 242 Argote de Molina, Gonzalo, 9, 266, 297, 361 Ariza, 204, 205 Arlanzón River, 13 Arles, 177 Arnaldo de Cabrera, 208 Arnaldo de Rocafull, 228 Arnaldo Ogier, 221 Arnalt Bosquet, 130 Arnalt de Tarasco (settler in Cudiacibit), 142 Arranz Guzmán, Ana, 387 Arthurian legend, 70, 297 Asenjo González, María, 448 Aspe, 37, 38, 95, 96, 111, 112, 226, 244, 278, 283, 293, 379, 380, 398 Aspe el Nuevo, 278

490 Index Aspe el Viejo, 278 assembly of Almagro (1273), 152, 154 assembly of Ávila (1273), 153, 154 assembly of Badajoz (1280), 216 assembly of Jerez (1268), 125 assembly of Palencia (1283), 257, 294 assembly of Valladolid (1282), 195, 243, 293 assembly of Zamora (1274), 160–161, 162 Astorga, 80–81, 194 Asturias, 159 Atienza, 150, 151, 204–205 Auvray, Lucien, 357 Avignon, 177 Ávila, 49, 153, 155, 165, 261, 377, 386, 414, 416 Axarqui, 143 Ayala Martínez, Carlos de, 173, 188, 373, 377, 378, 381, 385, 386, 389, 392–393, 396, 398, 417, 420, 426, 443 Aymeri IV, viscount of Narbonne, 169 Ayora, 226, 238, 340 Aznalcázar, 33, 34, 362 Aznalfarache, 367 Aznar Pardo, 15 Aznar Pérez (brother of Juan Pérez), 267 Babington, Churchill, 85, 389, 392 Badajoz, 32, 120, 216, 242, 249, 283, 403 Baist, Gottfried, 419, 420, 454, 456 Baldovín de Cartagena, 118, 119 Baldwin I of Flanders and Hainaut, 7, 9 Ballesteros-Beretta, Antonio, 5, 9, 35, 45, 54, 60, 65, 74–75, 77–78, 80, 81, 83, 87, 91, 95, 96, 98, 99, 102, 110, 111, 119, 121, 122, 123, 125, 133, 134, 137, 138, 149, 154, 157, 167,

170, 173, 177, 187, 193, 195, 197, 205, 206, 211, 235, 236, 353, 355, 356, 358, 359, 360, 361, 363, 365, 366, 367, 369–370, 372–374, 389, 394, 395–400, 403–419, 421, 422, 424, 425, 428–442, 444–452, 455 Bandino Amanati de Pistoya, 415 Baños árabes, 133, 265 Bañuelos de Suso, 14 Barajas, 261 Barral I des Baux, 174, 176 Barral II des Baux, 190 Barrios García, Angel, 377 Barthe Porcel, Julio, 439 Barthélemy, Louis, 421 Battle of Alcoraz, 16, 271 Battle of Benevento, 174, 182, 287, 426 Battle of Écija, 166, 192 Battle of El Salado, 21 Battle of Guadalhoce, 21 Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa, 15, 16, 17, 271 Battle of Martos, 170 Battle of Roccavione, 189 Battle of Tablada, 18 Battle of Tagliacozzo, 128 Baumel, Jean, 444 Bayonne, 194, 199, 220, 221, 230, 291 Beatrice (daughter of Alfonso X), 138, 139, 169, 174, 185, 186, 189, 222, 286 Beatrice (daughter of Infante Fadrique), 144 Beatrice (illegitimate daughter of Alfonso X, Queen of Portugal), 15, 32, 82, 120, 216, 252, 258, 262, 282 Beatrice (daughter of Peter II of Savoy), 180, 186, 188 Beatrice (daughter of Henry III), 26, 39, 48, 64, 180, 279, 286, 299, 300 Beatrice (eldest daughter of Philip of Swabia), 8



Index 491

Beatrice Contesson of Savoy, 85, 115, 157, 164, 169, 173, 174, 176, 178, 179, 182, 184–188, 189, 190–191, 200, 208, 220, 229, 234, 245, 246, 251, 259, 261, 263, 267, 268, 270, 273, 274, 285–286, 288, 292, 298, 348, 349 Beatrice, countess of Burgundy, 183 Beatrice d’Albon, 174 Beatrice de Lauria, 220 Beatrice de Thiern, 183 Beatrice Fieschi, 85 Beatrice of Burgundy (Infante Manuel’s maternal great grandmother), 7 Beatrice of Portugal (second wife of Juan I), 297 Beatrice of Provence, 175, 177, 178 Beatrice of Savoy, 174, 177, 178, 181, 220, 222, 286–287 Beatrice of Swabia (daughter of Frederick I), 183 Beatrice of Swabia (wife of Fernando III, mother of Infante Manuel), 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 21, 22, 24, 26, 70, 123, 268, 275, 278, 295–296, 356 Beaucaire, 66, 146, 161, 165, 166–167, 170, 187, 189, 194, 222, 262, 282, 285, 426 Béla III, king of Hungary and Croatia, 6–7 Belbimbre, 128, 259, 309, 310 Belley, 184 Belmonte, 58, 92 Benahofar, 24 Benavente, 272–273 Benavía, 223–224 Benavides, Antonio, 258, 447, 452 Benexí, 190, 427 Benicanal, 126 Beniçot, 142, 267 Benicotota, 267

Benihiar, 117 Benimongit, 272 Beninaia, 117 Benvenuto de Sancto Giorgio, 408, 425, 441 Berenguela (sister of Infante Manuel), 11, 20, 26, 255, 258, 310, 358 Berenguela (daughter of Alfonso X), 26, 48, 51, 232, 415 Berenguela (mother of Fernando III, grandmother of Infante Manuel), 4, 23, 25, 224, 278 Berenguela (sister of Fernando III, wife of Jean de Brienne), 8, 60 Berenguela Alfonso (daughter of Alfonso de Molina), 106 Berenguer de Moncada, 305 Berenguer Girones, 221 Berkhamsted, 84 Bernald (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 323 Bernalt de Centellas, 207, 208 Bernalt de Torreplena, 402 Bernardo, canon of Tuy, 81 Bernardo de Bellvis, 256 Bernardo de Sarriá, 427 Beroiz Lazcano, Marcelino, 409 Bertran de Born, 9 Bertrand II des Baux, count of Avellino, 190 Bertrand, lord of Moirans, 188 Bertrand VIII d’Anduze, 174 Besançon, 77, 78, 81, 82, 184, 189, 301 Béziers, 164, 441 Bianca Lancia, 220 Biar, 103, 104, 159, 216, 220, 221, 238, 331, 335, 336, 377, 434 bishopric of Cartagena, 36, 97, 145, 217, 252, 281, 283 bishopric of Cuenca, 129 Blanca (illegitimate daughter of Infante Manuel), 266

492 Index Blanca (daughter of Fernando II de la Cerda), 296 Blanche (daughter of Louis IX), 130, 192, 204, 205, 210, 425 Blanche of Anjou (second wife of Jaime II), 374, 427 Blanche of Artois (wife of Henry I of Navarre), 161, 162, 197 Blasco Maza II, lord of Borja, 16, 271 Blasco Pérez (vassal of Infante Manuel), 305 Blecua, José Manuel, 353, 405 Bletterans, castle of, 184 Bofarull y Mascaró, Próspero de, 372 Bogarra, 37 Bohigas, Pedro, 383 Böhmer, Johann Friedrich, 64, 77, 78, 301, 364, 380, 383, 385, 386, 388, 389, 391, 393, 394, 420, 422, 425, 426 Bolzani, Giovanni Pierio Valeriano, 363 Bona Senna (Infante Manuel’s partitioner), 322, 324 Boniface I, count of Savoy, 174, 179, 181, 184, 185, 287 Boniface I of Montferrat, 7 Boniface II of Montferrat, 174, 179, 185, 222 Boniface of Savoy, archbishop of Canterbury, 164, 175, 178, 179, 180 Bordeaux, 39, 254 Borgabenalcadí, 25, 33, 42, 368 Borja, 16, 205, 212, 271, 434, 439 Bozzola, Annibale, 420 Brenes, 23, 140, 409 Brihuega, 56, 158, 171 Bruhn de Hoffmeyer, Ada, 409 Bugarra, 455 Buitrago, 246, 448 Buñol, 215 Burgo de Osma, 194 Burgos, 4, 10, 13, 20, 26–27, 31, 37, 41, 45, 46, 60, 63, 68, 78, 80, 87, 89,

123, 125, 126, 128, 130, 132, 133, 134, 135, 149, 150, 151, 158, 159, 169, 180, 191, 196, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 206, 207, 208, 210, 219, 220, 221, 222, 224, 225, 240, 245, 247, 253, 254–255, 256, 265, 288, 289, 344, 354, 357, 358, 360, 367, 373, 375, 379, 382, 407, 414, 425, 431, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439, 442, 448, 450, 453 Burns, Robert I., 409 Bury St. Edmonds, 83 Busot, 38, 278 Buyena, 25, 33 Cabanes Catalá, María Luisa, 259, 260, 323, 324, 338, 344, 348, 349, 397, 436, 452, 454–456 Cabanes Pecourt, Desamparado, 375 Cabezuelo Pliego, José Vicente, 440 Cabo de Palos, 145, 252, 267, 373, 410 Cáceres, 148, 381, 411 Cádiz, 47, 148, 239, 368 cafiz, 406 Calasparra, 118 Calatayud, 44, 45, 51, 52, 53, 54, 204–205, 280 Caleruega, 204, 407 Callosa, 18, 37, 112, 248–249 Calvo, José María, 454 Camarena, 193 Cambullón, 23, 38, 279 Campesina, 367 Campi, Pietro Maria, 414 Campillo, 225, 226, 227, 231, 234, 292, 443 Can de Muño, 10 Canellas, Angel, 448 Cantera Burgos, Francisco, 373, 446 Cantigas: Cantiga 122, 11, 26, 358; Cantiga 131, 357; Cantiga 185, 196; Cantiga 209, 200, 435; Cantiga 235,



Index 493

158, 165, 166, 169, 170, 187, 198, 201, 206, 288, 289, 413, 419, 425, 428, 435–436, 446; Cantiga 256, 358; Cantiga 292, 358; Cantiga 342, 357; Cantiga 366, 99, 234, 235, 239; Cantiga 367, 231; Cantiga 376, 234, 236, 239; Cantiga 382, 227, 229, 230, 239, 443, 444; Cantiga 386, 237; Cantiga 78, 18 Cantigas de escarnio, 15, 361 Cantigas de Santa Maria, 9, 10, 11, 432 Carabixa, 437 Caravaca, 272 Caravaca de la Cruz, 118 Carlos I, king of Spain, 298 Carlos II, king of Spain, 275, 297 Carlos III, king of Spain, 298 Carlos, prince of Viana, 197, 430 Carmona Ruiz, María Antonia, 416 Carpentras, 427 Carrión de los Condes, 3, 4, 10, 12, 163, 278, 353 Cartagena, 58, 59, 78, 81, 86, 119, 122, 159, 242, 247, 257, 260, 272–273, 381, 392–393, 414–415, 440–441 Casal Martínez, Federico, 372–373 Cascales, Francisco de, 95, 96, 98, 267, 379, 398, 404, 407, 442, 444, 454 Casiellas, 117, 272 Castellón, 220 Castellver, fortress of, 227 Castro Garrido, Araceli, 366, 407 Catalán, Diego, 355, 428, 447 Catalín (vassal of Beatrice Contesson of Savoy), 427 Cathedral: of Cartagena, 272; of Seville, 14, 31, 66, 140, 161, 207, 268, 368–369; of Toledo, 700; of Zamora, 50 Catral, 40–41 CAX, 47, 63, 81, 94, 96, 100, 110, 113, 114, 120, 131, 135, 147, 148, 150,

151, 152, 153, 156, 157, 158, 162, 163, 165, 170, 171, 192, 193, 195, 202, 204, 207, 214, 215, 216, 217, 219, 220, 225, 226, 231, 234, 239, 243, 244, 246, 247, 249, 251, 252, 254, 255, 257, 258, 272, 288, 292, 355, 375, 376, 380, 383, 388, 402, 403, 406, 409, 412, 413, 414, 416, 417–418, 419, 420, 428, 429, 431, 433, 434, 435–436, 438, 439–441, 445, 447, 448, 449, 452, 456 Cecile des Baux, 174, 176, 179, 184, 185, 188, 189, 190, 222 Celada, 10 Celda, 272 Cenetes, 235 Cenicientos, 267 Centellas, Aymerique, 208 Cerdá Ruiz-Funes, Joaquín, 432 Çerraja, 362 Ceutí, 224 Chabás y Llorens, Roque, 386 Chablais, County of, 173–174 Chalon-sur-Saône, 270 Chambéry, 163 Char medina, 233 Charles of Anjou, 61, 127–128, 135, 138, 169, 175, 178, 181, 182, 185, 186, 208, 211, 220, 223, 230, 238, 241, 254, 284, 426 Charles of Salerno, 220 Chaves, Bernabé de, 372, 398 Chevalier, Ulysse, 416, 426 Chifflet, Jean-Jacques, 301 Chinchilla, 15–16, 37, 118, 129, 244, 245, 249, 293, 341, 342, 455 Chincoya, 196 Chinosa, 447 Christina of Norway, 25, 64, 65, 74, 90, 282, 386 Chronica latina regum Castellae, 4, 12, 356, 357

494 Index Chronicon imaginis, 357 Church of San Juan, Murcia, 17 Cieza, 37, 147, 227, 230 Cifuentes, 60, 162 Cingolani, Stefano M., 443, 448 Ciudad Real, 152 Ciudad Rodrigo, 260 Clement IV, 81, 87, 128, 303, 393–394 Cocentaina, 97, 238 Cofrentes, 118 Collera, 13, 360 Colmenares, Diego de, 69, 142, 296, 379, 437 Comtat Venaissin, 190, 427 Conde Lucanor, 16, 129, 144, 251, 356, 362, 441 Conrad IV (son of Frederick II), 8, 60–62 Conradin (son of Conrad IV), 61–62, 82, 127–128, 426 Conrado Lancia, 220, 221, 238, 335 Constance (daughter of Gaston VII, viscount of Béarn), 110, 111, 180, 286 Constance (wife of Henry VI), 7–8 Constance of Aragón (wife of Frederick II), 174, 286 Constance of Aragón (first wife of Infante Manuel), 40, 43, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 65, 76, 86, 89, 92, 93, 107, 110, 111, 112, 115, 144, 180, 183, 187–188, 262, 263, 264–265, 279, 280, 282, 286, 287, 304, 312 Constance of Aragón (daughter of Jaime II, second wife of Juan Manuel), 43, 144, 190, 245, 297 Constance of Sicily (wife of Pedro III), 76, 82, 119, 174, 180, 181, 182, 211, 220, 222, 223, 238, 286–287 Constanza Manuel de Castilla (wife of Pedro I), 297 Copinger, Walter A., 391–392

Córdoba, 13, 17, 19, 23, 36, 40, 101, 102, 115, 128, 138, 153, 156, 157, 200, 204, 230, 231, 234, 235, 240, 247–252, 253, 253–254, 292, 293, 369, 435, 444 Coria, 235, 236 Corominas, Joan, 359–360, 397, 406 Cortes of Burgos: (1269), 131, 132; (1270), 133, 134; (1272), 149, 284; (1274), 158, 159; (1276), 191, 194, 196–198, 288, 289 Cortes of Segovia: (1278), 204–207, 209, 290; (1386), 69 Cortes of Seville: (1252), 31, 32; (1261), 79, 80, 92, 93; (1281), 234–237, 239, 240, 292 Cortes of Toledo: (1254), 40; (1259), 74, 77, 82 Cortes of Valladolid (1258), 63–64 Council of Lyon (1245), 177; (1274), 144, 153, 158–162, 165, 208, 284 Cox, Eugene L., 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 455 Craddock, Jerry R., 355, 428 Crespi de Valldaura, Gonzalo, 375 Crevillente, 18, 37, 112, 115, 283, 379, 398 Crónica abreviada, 90 Crónica de Alfonso X. See CAX Crónica de Alfonso XI (1344), 21 Crónica de la población de Ávila, 49 Crónica geral de Espanha de 1344, 5, 68, 355 Crónica particular de San Fernando, 12–13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 362 Cuarta Crónica General, 288 Cudiacibit, 119, 142, 159, 223, 414–415 Cuéllar, 79, 245, 387, 398, 416 Cuenca, 58, 79, 93, 101, 129, 135, 139, 147, 148, 154, 157, 200, 209, 213, 214, 215, 397, 406, 411, 439



Index 495

Cultullana, 35 Cummins, John G., 360 Dalmacio de Villarasa, 221 Dante Alighieri, 175, 356, 420 Darder, 117 Daumet, Georges, 375, 431, 432, 433, 449 De mineralibus, 25 del Estal, Juan Manuel, 225, 401 Del Giudice, Giuseppe, 423, 426 Del Valle Curieses, Rafael, 409 Delle Donne, Fulvio, 385 Denholm-Young, Noël, 380, 383, 421 Denia, 205 Desclot, Bernat, 170–171, 418 Devoto, Daniel, 405 Deyermond, Alan, 353 Diego (first cousin of Don Ladrón), 141 Diego Copín de Holanda, 700 Diego López de Mendoza, 269, 270 Diego López de Salcedo, 194, 202, 246, 253, 256, 257, 288 Diego López II de Haro, el Bueno, 11, 18, 396 Diego López III de Haro, 12, 17, 43, 44, 49, 70, 92, 246, 257, 280, 423, 431 Diego López IV de Haro, 197–198 Diego López V de Haro, 46, 246, 256, 257, 261 Diego Martínez (Infante Sancho’s notary), 271, 273 Diego Sánchez de Bustamante, 95, 96–98, 217, 231, 242, 246, 282, 397–398 Diego Sánchez de Funes, 66, 70, 151 Díez de Revenga, Francisco Javier, 353 dinero prieto, 201, 457 Dinis, king of Portugal, 5, 68, 93, 119, 120, 121, 195, 216–217, 243, 262, 281, 283, 296

Discalced Friars, Convent of in Peñafiel, 259, 263, 265, 269, 273, 295 Domingo Esteban (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 233–234 Domingo Monzón, 130 Domingo Nuño, 310–311 Domingo Pascual, archbishop-elect of Toledo, 194 Domingo Pérez (Infante Manuel’s partitioner), 130 Domingo Pérez (settler in San Bartolomé), 142 Domingo Pérez (Infante Manuel’s foot soldier), 143 Domingo Pérez (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 335 Domínguez Sánchez, Santiago, 317, 318, 320, 321, 413 Domitian, 448 Don Abram (Infante Manuel’s physician), 272, 274, 295 Don Gil, subdeacon, 79 Don Guerrero, 130 Don Juste (Infante Manuel’s partitioner), 322, 324 Don Zag (Infante Manuel’s tax collector), 126, 207 Don Zag (Infante Manuel’s physician), 272, 274, 295 Doña Toda (wife of Corvo Ibáñez), 224 Doña Toda (Infante Manuel’s ama), 4, 224, 225 donadío menor, 12 Drew de Barentine, 300 Duchy of Gascony, 39 Dueñas, monastery of, 115, 407 Durance River, 427 Durand, Ursin, 364, 401 Écija, 115, 158, 198, 249, 365 Edmund (son of Henry III), 61, 62, 75, 85

496 Index Edward I, king of England, 39, 41, 48, 64, 83, 84, 85, 135, 179, 188–189, 194, 204, 219, 279, 286, 439 Egas Fafez, bishop of Coimbra, 81 Eighth Crusade, 134 Elche, 37, 41, 58, 59, 69, 95–97, 101, 102, 105, 106, 108–112, 123–127, 130, 132– 134, 136–138, 159, 196, 199, 200, 207, 209, 217, 220, 225, 226, 231–233, 235, 244, 249, 258, 259, 261–263, 265, 267, 273, 274, 281, 283, 284, 289, 304, 308, 311–314, 322, 323, 325, 332–333, 338, 348, 377, 379; capitulation of, 261; castellan in, 130; magistrate in, 233 Elda, 18, 37, 38, 58, 59, 93, 95, 96, 105, 111, 112, 126, 207, 226, 231, 261– 262, 281, 283, 379–380, 398, 436 Eleanor of England (wife of Alfonso VIII, Infante Manuel’s greatgrandmother), 39, 279 Eleanor of Provence, 85, 175, 177, 179, 188, 286 Elfa de Azagra, 129, 144 Elisabeth (fourth daughter of Philip of Swabia, mother of Infante Manuel), 8 Elizabeth of Chalon, 183 Elvas, 216 Elvira Pérez, 267 Engels, Odilo, 415 Enrique (illegitimate son of Infante Manuel), 266 Enrique II, king of Castile, 5, 11, 275, 296 Enrique III, king of Castile, 13 Enrique, Infante (brother of Infante Manuel), 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13–14, 15, 20, 22, 23, 31, 33, 40, 41–43, 44–46, 49, 52, 53, 55, 63, 89, 90, 94, 125, 128, 194, 203, 280, 289, 358, 371, 398 Enrique Pérez de Harana, 35, 96, 97, 145, 147, 149

Ermengau, G. (Infante Manuel’s vassal), 305 Escalona, 225, 234, 235–236, 238, 240, 242, 246, 251, 254, 257, 261, 262, 263, 267, 273, 292, 388, 397, 454 Escamilla, 261 Esclaramunda (daughter of Roger IV), 115 Escolano, Gaspar, 208 Escrivá de Balaguer, José, 450 Escudero de la Peña, José María, 432–433 Espada Lobera (legendary sword of Fernando III), 20–21, 30 Espinalt y García, Bernardo, 15, 361 Espinosa de los Monteros, Pablo, 359, 360 Esquerdo, Onofre, 410 Essex, 85, 390, 391 Esteban Fernández de Castro, 121, 137, 144, 155 Estella, 44 Estoria de España, 18, 23, 24, 26, 42, 90, 357, 359 Etienne III of Burgundy, 183, 185 Eubel, Konrad, 387 Eudoxia (great niece of Manuel I Komnenos), 9, 357 Eustache de Beaumarchais, 197, 202 Extremadura, 280 Ezzelino da Romano, 62, 380 Fadrique, Infante (brother of Infante Manuel), 3, 7, 9, 10–11, 13–14, 20, 22–23, 31, 33, 38, 40, 41–42, 54, 60, 62–64, 65, 74, 89, 90, 94, 125, 135–136, 139, 140, 144, 146, 147, 152, 155, 156, 162, 198, 200, 203, 243, 282–283, 289, 358, 385–386, 406, 429–430, 433 Fanta, Adolf, 87, 303, 385, 394 Faro, castle of, 304



Index 497

Fatheringham, John K., 357 Fátima (Infante Manuel’s slave), 116 Felipe (brother of Pero Johan), 143 Felipe, Infante (brother of Infante Manuel), 3–6, 11, 13, 14, 25, 31, 33, 34, 40, 41, 45, 54, 60, 62–63, 65, 70, 74, 89, 90, 91, 92–94, 120–121, 125, 138, 140, 144, 146, 147, 150, 151, 152–155, 163, 197, 203, 271, 282, 283, 284, 289, 354, 358, 366, 386, 389, 403–404, 406, 407, 412 Felipe V, king of Spain, 297 Felises (Infante Manuel’s vassal), 399 Fernán Pérez de Ayala (father of author Pero López de Ayala), 11 Fernán Pérez Ponce de León, 15, 198, 252–254 Fernán Ruiz de Castro, 25, 155 Fernán Ruiz de Manzanedo, 18 Fernán Ruiz de Maza, 16, 270, 271 Fernán Ruiz de Orozco, 258 Fernán Sánchez de Valladolid, 5, 47, 193, 195 Fernández de Pulgar, Pedro, 367 Fernández Duro, Cesáreo, 429 Fernández Martín, Luis, 299, 408 Fernando (illegitimate son of Infante Manuel), 266 Fernando (son of Juan Manuel), 267 Fernando de Covarrubias, bishop of Burgos, 244 Fernando de la Cerda, Infante (son of Alfonso X), 25, 51, 60, 62, 91, 97–98, 130–131, 135, 138, 147, 149– 150, 151, 153, 156, 158, 162, 187, 190–191, 192, 195, 210, 247, 249, 269, 282, 284, 285, 288, 289, 295, 296–297, 406, 407, 414, 425 Fernando de Pontis or Ponthieu, Infante (half-brother of Infante Manuel), 24, 60 Fernando I, king of Aragón, 298

Fernando I, king of Portugal, 297 Fernando Ibáñez, 14 Fernando II de la Cerda, 29, 275 Fernando II, king of Aragón, 298 Fernando II, king of León, 11 Fernando III, king of Castile, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12–13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21–22, 23, 24, 30, 32, 36–37, 63, 68, 70, 72, 95–96, 123, 224, 268, 275, 278, 286, 355–356, 387, 431 Fernando, Infante (brother of Infante Manuel), 23, 697 Fernando IV, king of Castile, 5, 10, 11, 15, 20, 114, 195, 274, 295, 406 Fernando Ladrón, merino mayor de Castilla, 16 Fernando Ordóñez (master of Order of Calatrava), 15, 30 Fernando Rodríguez (prior of Hospitallers), 15, 17 Fernando Sánchez, 381 Fernando V, king of Castile, 298 Fernando Velázquez, bishop of Segovia, 80, 150, 151 Fernando VI, king of Spain, 297 Ferrán Pérez (dean of Seville), 210, 211, 229, 330 Ferrán Pérez de Pina, 118 Ferrán Pérez Enamorado, 267, 274 Ferrán Ruiz de Castro, 144, 153 Ferrant Gonçaluo (cup bearer of Queen Violante), 143 Ferrer de Castelló, 227 Ferrer i Mallol, María Teresa, 248, 441, 448, 454 Feyshurat Elphaque Earisxet, 238, 341 Ficker, Julius, 64 Fifth Crusade, 8 filo de agua, 312 First Crusade, 356 Fitero, 132, 133, 414

498 Index Flórez de Ocariz, Juan, 239, 446 Flórez, Enrique, 204, 357, 358, 366, 434 Floriano, Antonio C., 204 Foggia, 23 Folquet de Marseille, 9 Fontana, Pierina, 420 Forcalquier, 177 Fortuín García, 141 Fortuín Sánchez (judicial magistrate of Murcia), 141 Fortuño Maza, 16, 271 Fourth Crusade, 7 Fradejas, José Manuel, 360, 445 Franche-Comté, 183 Francisco Olmos, José María, 432–433, 454 Frankfurt, 185 Fray Domingo (knight commander of Hospital del Rey), 258–259, 310 Fray Martín, bishop of Segovia, 78, 79, 80, 82, 87, 89, 387 Frederick, duke of Swabia (Infante Manuel’s maternal greatgrandfather), 7 Frederick I, 6–7, 9, 22, 183, 287 Frederick II, 7–8, 22, 23, 60, 61, 62, 64, 174, 175, 176–177, 178, 220, 393 Frèdol de Saint-Bonnet, 163, 164, 166 Fuensanta del Valle, Feliciano Ramírez de Arrellano, Marqués de la, 428 Fuente, Vicente de la, 265, 361 Fuentedueña, 128, 259, 309, 310 Funes, Leonardo, 355, 382 Fuster Ruiz, Francisco, 399 Gabela, 233 Gaibrois de Ballesteros, Mercedes, 353, 363, 366, 423, 427, 429, 444, 452, 453 Galicia, 47, 137, 159, 247–248 Galland, Bruno, 421

Gallofre Guinovart, Rafael, 444 Garci Jofré de Loaysa, 96, 230–231 Garci Martínez de Toledo, 55 Garci Pérez de Toledo, 35, 59 Garci Suárez (merino mayor of Murcia), 59, 66, 70, 96–97, 99, 137 García Almoravid, 239 García, bishop of Silves, 393–394 García de la Borbolla, Ángeles, 410 García Díaz, Isabel, 379, 398 García Domínguez (Alfonso X’s notary), 35, 141, 369 García Domínguez, 33–34, 369–370 García Dóminguez de Cuéllar, 35 García Fernández (grand master of Order of Alcántara), 252 García Fernández de Villamayor, 3–4, 10–11, 17, 18, 69, 260, 279, 299 García Fernández Manrique, 93 García Fernández Sarmiento, 17 García Ferrando Terrer, 221 García IV Ramírez, king of Navarre, 161 García Pérez (Alfonso X’s notary), 50 García Sáinz de Baranda, Julián, 382, 416 García Sánchez (vassal of Queen Violante), 437 García Sánchez de Cartagena, 437 García Sánchez de Saix, 437 García Sánchez de Santa Cruz (vassal of Infante Manuel), 209, 328 García Sánchez de Terol, 437 García Soriano, Justo, 412 Garcimuñoz, 92 Garibay, Esteban de, 239, 446 Garsenda de Forcalquier, 179 Garsenda de Sabran-Forcalquier, 174–175 Gascony, 16, 39, 48, 55, 179, 180, 203–204, 271, 373, 422 Gaspar Escolano, Juan, 451



Index 499

Gaston VII, viscount of Béarn, 39, 110, 179, 180, 186, 188, 286 Gavilanes Laso, José Luis, 450 Gelsinger, Bruce E., 64, 380 Gelves, 23, 38, 140, 278–279 Genzena, 363 Gerald of Wales, 71–72 Gerona, 417–418, 419 Gibraleón, 45, 120 Gil Garcés I de Azagra, 144 Gil Garcés II de Azagra, 128, 141, 143 Gil García (Infante Manuel’s partitioner), 124 Gil García (Infante Manuel’s castellan in Elche), 130 Gil Manrique de Manzanedo, 20 Gilabert Ferrando Terrer, 221 Gilaberto Centellas, 208 Gilbert de Clare, 84, 441 Giménez Soler, Andrés, 266, 359, 397, 401, 423, 426, 427, 444, 447, 452, 453, 454 Giraut de Borneil, 9 Girona Llagustera, Daniel, 423 Glick, Thomas F., 410, 446 Godfrey of Bouillon, 356 Goffredo di Alatri, 76 Gómez Domingo, 310 Gómez Fernández de Orozco, 246, 257, 258, 260, 261, 269–270, 271, 273 Gómez Gil de Villalobos, 198 Gómez Moreno, Manuel, 265, 376 Gómez Nuño, 49 Gómez Ruiz Manzanedo, 18 Goñi Gaztambide, José, 357 González Arce, José Damián, 408 González Díez, Emiliano, 354, 438, 439, 442, 448, 450 González Hurtebise, Eduardo, 454 González Jiménez, Manuel, 134, 149, 154, 193, 197, 202, 258, 355, 364, 367, 371, 372, 375, 376, 377, 378,

380, 384, 387, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 403, 406, 407, 408, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 428, 429, 430, 432, 433, 434, 438, 439, 440, 445, 448, 449, 450, 451, 452, 456 González, Julio, 354, 355, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 370, 371, 373, 453 González Palencia, Ángel, 306, 453 Gonzalo, archbishop of Santiago, 81 Gonzalo de Hinojosa, bishop of Burgos, 428 Gonzalo Domínguez (Infante Manuel’s ayo), 33, 34, 35, 279 Gonzalo Eanes Doviñal, 37, 47 Gonzalo Gil, 20 Gonzalo González Girón, 15, 18 Gonzalo Ibáñez (Infante Manuel’s partitioner), 124, 130 Gonzalo Ibáñez de Baztán, 239 Gonzalo Mateos, 49 Gonzalo Pérez Gudiel, 453 Gonzalo Ruiz de Atienza, 118 Gonzalo Ruiz de la Vega, 46 Gonzalo Ruiz Girón, 218 Gonzalvo Gómez de Manzanedo, 198 Gran Crónica de Alfonso XI (1376-1379), 21 Granada, 103, 107, 117, 125, 148, 151, 155, 195, 218, 231, 234, 235, 271, 292, 453 Gregory IX, 8, 9, 22, 177 Gregory X, 81, 144, 146, 149, 154, 158, 161, 162, 163–164, 165, 167, 168, 186–187, 188, 189, 196, 208, 262, 284, 415 Gross, Georg, 367 Guadalajara, 135, 153–154, 156, 157, 158, 204, 379 Guadalquivir River, 235 Gualterio de Burgo, 79

500 Index Guardamar, 112, 221, 336 Guerrero Ventas, Pedro, 402 Guia de Bourgogne (daughter of Hugh III de Chalon), 186 Guichard, Pierre, 408 Guigues VII, dauphin of Viennois, 180 Guillaume (brother of Aymeri IV), 419 Guillaume Anelier de Toulouse, 429, 430, 432 Guillaume de Nangis, 178, 421, 429–430 Guillaume IV de Thiern, 183 Guillelma (daughter of Gaston VII), 110–111, 180, 246, 286 Guillem de Narbona, 402 Guillem II de Montcada, viscount of Béarn, 179 Guillén de Alcalá, 16 Guillén el Alemán, 18, 37 Guillén I de Rocafull, 115, 182, 210, 227, 228, 229 Guillén II de Rocafull, 230 Guillermo (Benedictine abbot of Sahagún), 22–23 Guiraud, Jean, 388 Guisarat, 23 Gutierre Ruiz de Olea, bishop of Córdoba, 14, 16 Gutiérrez Baños, Fernando, 419 Guy de Montlaur, bishop of Valence, 163, 164 Haakon IV, king of Norway, 64–65 Haro, castle of, 93, 110, 180 Hartmann V, count of Kyburg, 183 Harvey, Ruth E., 183 Hautecombe, 179 Hecht, Winfried, 357 Heliche, 32, 33, 299, 368, 381 Hellín, 37, 129, 278, 447 Helvetia, 182, 183, 185 Henry de Cokefeld, 85

Henry I, king of Navarre, 136, 150, 161, 162, 191, 197 Henry II, duke of Brabant, 8 Henry II, king of England, 9, 61 Henry III, king of England, 26, 39, 48, 49, 55–56, 61, 62, 64, 65, 71, 75, 81, 83, 85, 175, 176, 177, 179, 180, 188, 204, 279, 286, 299 Henry of Almain, 87, 111 Henry the Lion, duke of Saxony and Bavaria, 61 Henry VI, Holy Roman Emperor (older brother of Philip of Swabia), 8 Hermandades, 247, 293 Hernández, Francisco J., 365–366, 372, 412, 413, 448 Hernández Serna, Joaquín, 229, 443 Hinojosa Montalvo, José, 406, 408 Hita, 204 Honorius III, 8, 123 Hospital del Rey, Burgos, 128, 258, 259, 266, 309, 344, 439 House of Austria, 297 House of Manuel de Villena, 298 House of Savoy, 163, 169–170, 173, 175, 176, 177, 178, 180–182, 186, 187, 188, 189, 222, 285, 286, 287, 297, 426 Huarte y Echenique, Amalio, 379, 403 Hubert of Canterbury, 72 Huebre, 49 Huelva, 45, 120 Huete, 154, 261, 271, 273, 274, 368, 427, 454 Hugh III de Chalon, 183, 185, 186 Hugh III, duke of Burgundy, 174 Hugh IV, duke of Burgundy, 75, 77, 79, 183, 185 Hugh of La Marche, 390 Huici Miranda, Ambrosio, 372, 375, 387, 411, 417, 444



Index 501

Ibáñez Escerdo (Infante Manuel’s vassal), 305 Ibarra y Ruiz, Pedro, 109, 313, 377, 379–380 Ibn Abi Zar, 148, 249, 253, 411, 417, 433–434, 438, 448, 449 Ibn al-Ahmar. See Mohammed I ibn Nasr Ibn Hud, king of Murcia, 98–99 Ibn Khaldūn, 417 Ibn Mahfuz, emir of Niebla, 45, 94 Iglesia Ferreirós, Aquilino, 57 Inclán, Regino, 416 Inés (wife of Pedro López de Ayala, Infante Manuel’s ayo), 12 Inés de Castro (second wife of Infante Felipe), 25 Infantes de la Cerda, 29, 67, 203, 204, 210, 211–212, 215, 219, 221, 226, 234, 237, 274–275, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 295, 296 Iñigo López de Mendoza, 271 Iñigo López, lord of Vizcaya, 238–239 Innocent III, 7, 8, 71–72 Innocent IV, 23, 26, 43, 61, 72, 79, 85, 91, 177, 178, 282, 365, 420, 421, 431 Innocent V, 196 Ireland, 83, 389 Irene (wife of John II Komnenos), 6–7 Irene (wife of Philip of Swabia, Infante Manuel’s maternal grandmother), 7 Isaac II Angelos, 7, 8 Isaac Komnenos (older brother of Manuel I), 9 Isabel (daughter of Richard of Cornwall), 174 Isabel (daughter of Jaime I), 228–229 Isabel (daughter of Sancho IV), 272 Isabel de Aragón (wife of Philippe III), 43

Isabel de Clare (wife of William VII, marquess of Montferrat), 222 Isabel de Mallorca, 115, 182, 261, 453 Isabel I, queen of Castile, 297 Isabel II, queen of Spain, 298 Isabel Marshall, 84, 441 Isabel of Angoulême, 390 Isabel of Courtenay, 183, 184, 287, 423, 425 Isère, 188 Isso, 37, 129, 278, 447 Izquierdo Benito, Ricardo, 372, 447 Jacarilla, 260 Jacobo de las Leyes, 143, 210, 229, 330 Jacopo da Acqui, 357 Jaén, 13, 15, 19, 24, 113, 116–117, 122, 129, 151, 170, 211, 221, 234, 247–248, 291, 292, 373, 410 Jaime de Roca, 120 Jaime I de Xérica, 16, 129, 144 Jaime I, king of Aragón, 9, 16, 24, 26, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 46, 50, 56, 57, 76, 78, 89–91, 92, 95, 96, 99–115, 117, 118, 119, 120, 128, 131, 133, 134, 136, 143, 157, 158, 159, 160, 163, 164, 169, 170, 174, 175, 177, 179, 180, 181, 182, 196, 208, 210, 220, 227, 228, 229, 230, 270–271, 279, 280, 286, 287, 288, 374, 375, 395, 409, 415, 417–418, 422–423 Jaime II de Xérica, 220, 362 Jaime II, king of Aragón, 93, 111, 112, 114, 190, 230, 245, 258, 261, 262, 267, 272, 362, 453 Jaime II, king of Mallorca, 115, 144, 181, 182, 226, 229, 230, 287 Jaime III de Xérica, 129, 144, 220–221 Jaime, Infante (son of Alfonso X), 216, 240, 242, 245, 248, 252, 292, 293 Játiva, 103, 214, 218–219, 290, 291 Jean “Cabaret” d’Orronville, 424

502 Index Jean de Brienne (titular king of Jerusalem), 8, 60 Jean de Chalon-Rochefort, 184, 185 Jean I le Sage, 183, 184, 425 Jeanne de Ponthieu (second wife of Fernando III), 21, 24, 37–38, 39, 40, 42, 65, 94, 129, 179, 278, 286, 367, 371 Jeanne I, queen of Navarre, 161, 162, 197, 199, 415 Jerez, 24, 25, 100, 102, 125, 126, 127, 130, 204, 283, 405 Jimena Jurado, Martín de, 361 Jofré de Loaysa (Queen Violante’s ayo), 41, 93, 187, 231, 418 Johan de Tormón (settler in Santa María), 141 Johan García, 141 Johan Pérez (foot soldier of Don Ladrón), 141 Johan Sanchez de Ayala (Infante Manuel’s mayordomo), 359 John II Komnenos, 6 John Mansel, 48, 83, 85, 180, 299 John of Cockfield, 83, 84, 302, 390, 392 John of Heslerton. See John of Cockfield John XXI, 196, 201, 202, 289 Jordán de Podio, 221, 223, 337 Jordana (sister of Renier of Montferrat), 357 Jorquera, 15, 37, 118, 244, 293 jovada, 406 Juan Alfonso de Meneses, 18, 37, 271 Juan Alfonso de Molina, 77, 80, 244, 387, 393 Juan Alfonso, Fr. (Dominican monk), 3 Juan Arias, archbishop of Santiago de Compostela, 47, 75, 81, 384 Juan Bretón, 196, 260, 261, 274 Juan de Soria, bishop of Burgos, 25, 26, 27

Juan de Tarragona, 130 Juan Fernández (provincial master of Knights Templar), 252, 354 Juan Fernández (Infante Manuel’s cousin), 354 Juan Fernández de Limia, 256 Juan García (eldest son of García Fernández), 4, 18, 20, 30, 33, 70, 118, 128, 224, 260, 278, 283, 394 Juan García de Toledo (Alfonso X’s scribe), 35 Juan Gato de Zamora, 194, 288 Juan Gil de Zamora, 435–436 Juan González (master of Order of Calatrava), 122, 154, 155, 283, 284, 307 Juan González (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 324 Juan I, king of Castile, 5, 11, 13, 69, 275, 296, 297 Juan II, king of Aragón, 298 Juan, Infante (son of Alfonso X), 66, 138–139, 145, 174, 186, 203, 204, 216, 217, 222, 230, 231, 234, 240, 241, 242, 245, 248, 253, 254, 255, 286, 289, 292, 294, 445–446 Juan Manuel, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 13, 16, 19, 20, 21, 25, 30, 32, 34, 36, 40, 43, 44, 45, 46, 51, 52, 54, 57, 68, 70, 90, 93, 110, 111, 112, 115, 117, 122, 129, 144, 145, 164, 169, 173, 174, 182, 190, 200, 208, 220, 227, 230, 245, 246, 251, 252, 258, 260, 261, 262, 266–268, 270–275, 279, 283, 295–297, 334, 353, 355, 356, 359, 363, 374, 377, 397, 399, 401, 418, 420, 445, 456 Juan Marcos (Infante Enrique’s ayo), 11, 358 Juan Martínez (clérigo de coro), 387–388 Juan Martínez, bishop of Cádiz, 151



Index 503

Juan Muñoz, 310 Juan Núñez de Lara, 150, 155, 192, 198, 199, 203, 209, 213, 290 Juan Pérez (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 143, 305 Juan Pérez (archdeacon of Murcia), 220 Juan Pérez (treasurer of Murcia), 259, 267, 274 Juan Pérez, 34 Juan Pérez de Vallobar, 216, 330, 331 Juan Rocafull, 230 Juan Sánchez de Ayala (Infante Manuel’s mayordomo), 11, 259–260, 452 Juana Alfonso de Molina, 246 Juana Gómez de Manzanedo, 406 Juana I, queen of Castile, 297, 298 Juana Manuel (wife of Enrique II), 275 Juana, queen of Castile. See Jeanne de Ponthieu Júcar River, 92–93, 256 Jumilla, 230–231 Keller, John E., 169, 419, 432 kingdom: of Granada, 55, 99, 101, 129, 148, 151–153, 217, 240; of Murcia, 29, 35–37, 43, 52, 54–56, 59, 66, 70, 86, 96–98, 101, 105, 111– 116, 126, 127, 129, 132, 135–137, 139, 140, 143, 145, 149, 154, 159, 196, 200, 209, 216, 217, 225–226, 231, 234, 238, 242, 244, 246–248, 251, 252, 262, 267, 280–283, 293– 294, 337, 402; of Valencia, 196, 290; of Villena, 57, 104 Kinkade, Richard P., 169, 365, 367, 371, 374, 375, 399, 413, 419, 425, 427, 428, 432, 443, 446 Körting, Gustav, 397 Kunigunde (third daughter of Philip of Swabia), 8

La Rochette, 179, 185, 189 La Vid, monastery of, 257 Labande, Edmond René, 384 Labayru y Goicoechea, Estanislao Jaime de, 400 Laborde, Joseph de, 376 Ladaxa, 40–41 Ladrón, Don, 16, 17, 140, 141, 142, 143, 409 Lafont Mateo, Germán, 429, 442 Langlois, Charles-Victor, 383, 415, 429–430, 432 Languedoc, 169, 190 Lapidario, 237, 446 Las Huelgas, convent of, 11, 20, 26, 27, 128, 255, 265, 266, 358, 366, 367, 373, 374, 375, 439, 450 Latin Empire of Constantinople, 7 Laurette de Commercy, 423 Lausanne, 182 Lázaro Pérez (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 34, 125, 130 Le Betton, convent of, 178, 182, 422 Lebrija, 24, 47, 50, 51, 63, 100, 280 Ledesma, 257, 294 León, 4, 11, 31, 32, 62, 74, 80, 81, 120, 135, 153, 216, 247, 254, 255, 256, 366, 372, 380, 383, 384, 388, 403, 404, 428 Leonor (sister of Infante Manuel), 11, 26, 358 Leonor (daughter of Alfonso X), 170, 186, 187 Leonor (illegitimate daughter of Infante Alfonso de Molina), 354 Leonor (wife of Edward I, half-sister of Infante Manuel), 39, 41, 48, 64, 179, 180, 189, 279, 286 Leonor de Albuquerque (wife of Fernando I), 298 Leonor de Aragón (first wife of Juan I), 298

504 Index Leonor of Castile (daughter of Alfonso VIII, first wife of Jaime I), 40, 180, 286, 422 Leonor Ruiz de Castro (third wife of Infante Felipe), 25 Leonor Téllez de Meneses (wife of Fernando I), 297 Lera Maíllo, José Carlos de, 451 Lérida, 170, 171, 232 Lerma, 136, 144 Les Clées, 183 Libre dels feits, 9, 16, 41, 132, 362, 370, 373, 407, 455 Libro de la caça de las aves, 13, 445 Libro de la caza, 13, 18, 40, 93, 145, 252, 362, 445, 449 Libro de las armas, 3, 5, 10, 19, 20, 30, 43, 46, 51, 68, 93, 110, 112, 208, 245, 260, 272, 274, 295, 353, 354, 358, 359, 363, 370, 374, 375, 376, 377, 402, 436, 452 Libro de las tres razones. See Libro de las armas Libro de los estados, 190, 355, 427 Libro enfenido, 208, 274, 353, 436 Limoges, 270 Lindley Cintra, Luis Filipe, 355, 447 Linehan, Peter, 383, 384, 386, 387, 388, 389, 416, 429, 434 Lisbon, 217 Lizoain Garrido, José Manuel, 366, 367, 407 Llano de Tablada, 235 Llibre de les despeses, 123 Logroño, 132, 134, 202, 254, 312 Lomax, Derek, 9, 30, 48, 57, 81, 83, 87, 98, 173, 187, 353, 356, 360, 367, 368, 375, 376, 378, 379, 382, 388, 389, 392, 395, 398, 408, 420, 425, 426, 456 Lombardy, 119, 138, 157, 167, 178, 186, 187, 222 London, 26, 55, 175, 391

Lope de Mendoza, 142 Lope Descaño, 198 Lope Díaz II de Haro, Cabeza Brava, 3, 4, 11, 12, 194, 257, 299 Lope Díaz III de Haro, 45, 46, 49, 50, 121, 131, 134, 144, 150, 155, 192, 193, 194, 197, 202, 203, 213, 246, 248, 256, 257, 261, 270, 290, 430, 433 Lope Diego, Maestre, 72 Lope Íñiguez (comendador mayor, Order of Calatrava), 239 Lope López, 37 Lope Pérez (Infante Manuel’s falconer), 305 Lope Sánchez (master of Knights Templar), 110 Lopera, 12 Loperráez Corvalán, Juan, 366, 376, 377, 397, 401, 407, 434 López Fernández, Manuel, 13 López Ferreiro, Antonio, 375, 397 López Serrano, Aniceto, 440 Loranca de Tajuña, 58 Lorca, 58, 59, 107, 109, 115, 118, 134, 138, 143, 200, 219, 252, 272, 281, 326, 327, 334, 335, 456 Lorenzo Aben Hud, 260, 441 Los Barcos, 40 Los Cabeçuelos, 41 Louis (son of Philippe III), 161 Louis (son of Louis IX), 26, 48 Louis IX, king of France, 61, 84, 134, 135, 175, 176, 178, 181, 229, 286, 415, 421 Louis of Savoy, 184, 185 Louis XIV, king of France, 297 Lübeck, 64 Lucas de Tuy, 26, 357, 358 Lugon, Clovis, 455 Luis de Pontis or Ponthieu, Infante (half-brother of Infante Manuel), 18, 24, 60, 129, 147, 371



Index 505

Luongo, Salvatore, 449 Lyon, 144, 160, 163, 165, 177, 178, 182, 287, 318, 320, 321, 421, 437

Marcos Pous, Alejandro, 448 Margaret (daughter of Henry III), 26 Margaret (daughter of Béla III), 7 Margaret de Burgh, 441 Margarita Lancia, 220 Marguerite (daughter of Amalric I), 169 Marguerite (sister of Aymeri IV), 222 Marguerite de Faucigny, 173 Marguerite of Bourbon, queen regent of Navarre, 40, 54, 279 Marguerite of Montferrat, 138, 174, 186, 222, 254, 286 Marguerite of Provence, 176, 177, 286 Marguerite of Savoy, 174, 185, 222, 286 María (wife of Guillem Guasch), 248 María (sister of Infante Manuel), 26, 358 María (wife of Ferrán Pérez Enamorado), 267 María de Molina (wife of Sancho IV), 18, 230, 246, 247, 258, 265, 272, 274, 295 María Díaz, 299 María García de Villamayor (wife of Pedro Ruiz Sarmiento), 17 María Guillem (wife of Pedro II), 228 María Gutiérrez (abbess of Las Huelgas), 450 María Luisa of Savoy (wife of Felipe V), 297 María Sanz de Unza, 12 María Teresa de Austria (wife of Louis XIV), 297 Marie (second daughter of Philip of Swabia), 8 Marie of Montferrat (queen of crusader state of Jerusalem), 8 Marina García (daughter of Doña Toda), 224, 225, 354 Marina García (daughter of García Fernández), 4, 224

Macarena, 24 MacDonald, Robert A., 379, 428 Macpherson, Ian R., 427 Madrid, 3, 58, 95, 116, 150, 249, 306, 353, 355, 397, 412, 428 Maestre Fernando, bishop-elect of Oviedo, 81 Maestre Joan (Jaime I’s physician), 132 Maestre Nicolás (Alfonso X’s physician), 416 Maestro Sinicio, 79 Magacela, 13 Magdalino, Paul, 9, 356 Mahamud, 10, 13 Mahomet Abingalip, 105 Málaga, 250, 253 Malalana Ureña, Antonio, 446, 455 Maluenda, 44 mamelucos, 116 Mancha de Montaragón, 244, 293 Manfred III of Saluzzo, 174, 178, 222 Manfred of Sicily, 62, 64, 65, 71, 76, 79, 82, 174, 178, 180, 181, 182, 220, 222, 286, 287, 380, 395 Manrique, Cayetano, 437 Manrique, Fr. Angel, 357, 454 Manrique Pérez de Lara, lord of Molina, 169 Mansilla Reoyo, Demetrio, 364, 365, 383 Mañueco Villalobos, Manuel, 366, 381 Manuel Angelos (half-brother of Infante Manuel’s maternal grandmother), 7, 9, 356 Manuel I Komnenos, 6, 7, 9, 356, 357 Marca, Pierre de, 400 Marco Ximénez (Infante Manuel’s partitioner in Chinchilla), 341

506 Index Marinids, 144, 147, 148, 171, 201, 204, 234, 284, 285, 292 Marqués (Infante Manuel’s vassal), 305 Marrakesh, 148, 249 Marseilles, 56, 159, 163, 177 Marsh, Frank B., 372, 422 Martène, Edmond, 364, 401 Martín Alfonso (illegitimate halfbrother of Fernando III, uncle of Infante Manuel), 18, 30 Martín Alvarez de Ferrera, 260, 270 Martín Cantarino, Carlos, 373 Martín de Caparroso (settler in Santa María), 142 Martín Fernández (comendador, Order of Calatrava in Madrid), 116 Martín Fernández, bishop of León, 62, 195, 393 Martín Fernández Pantoja, 260 Martín Ferrández Pantoja, 259 Martín Fuertes, José Antonio, 451–452 Martin, Georges, 456 Martín Gil (illegitimate half-brother of Fernando III, uncle of Infante Manuel), 18, 30 Martin, Henri, 415 Martin IV, 223, 255, 294 Martín Martínez (Infante Manuel’s partitioner), 124, 130, 322, 324 Martín Martínez, 69, 224 Martín Martínez de Fazas (Infante Manuel’s bodyguard), 53 Martín Núñez (master of Templars in Castile and León), 14–15 Martín Pérez (vassal of Juan Manuel), 267 Martín Pérez de Fraga, 238, 340 Martín Ruiz, 141 Martín Suárez, 118, 119 Martín Talavera (dean of Burgos), 67 Martínez Caviró, Balbina, 402

Martínez, H. Salvador, 202, 385, 395, 432, 435, 440, 445 Master Albert de Parma (papal nuncio), 77, 86 Mataplana, church of, 357 Mateu y Llopis, Felipe, 402 Matilda (daughter of Henry II), 61 Matilda II, countess of Boulogne, 82 Matilda of Burgundy, 183 Matthew Paris, 41, 372 Mattoso, José, 454 Maud de Lacey, 441 Maurienne, county of, 173, 423 Mayor Alfonso de Meneses (mother of María de Molina), 18 Mayor Alfonso Fernández (Infante Manuel’s cousin), 354 Mayor Arias (wife of García Fernández), 4, 224 Mayor Guillén de Guzmán, 15, 32, 37, 59–60 Medellín, 251 Medina de Pomar, 161, 382 Medina del Campo, 65 Medina Sidonia, 24, 100 Medinaceli, 204–205 Mencía López de Haro, 4, 25, 194, 246, 257, 431 Mendavia, 162, 416 Menéndez Pidal, Ramón, 122, 359, 361, 413, 428 Meouak, Mohamed, 408 Mercedarians, 133, 265 Mérida, 249 Merlin, 70, 297 Merton, 389 Michael VIII Paleologus, 128 Michel de Relat (settler in Cudiacibit), 142 Michel, Francisque, 430 Miguel Pérez (Infante Manuel’s agent), 116, 117



Index 507

Milan, 23 Minateda, 37, 129, 278 Miquel Violeta, 115, 182 Miranda de Ebro, 241, 242 Miret i Sans, Joaquim, 16, 103, 123, 372, 375, 377, 378, 381, 399, 401, 403, 414, 415, 417–418, 419, 421, 423, 444 Moclín, castle of, 218 Moguer, 45 Mohammed I al-Mustansir, 90, 135, 395 Mohammed I ibn Nasr, 99, 100–103, 113, 136, 137, 147, 149, 152, 194, 196 Mohammed ibn Hud, taifa emir of Andalusia, 36 Mohammed II ibn Nasr, 152, 158, 215, 216, 231, 250 Mola, 112 Molina Molina, Angel Luis, 376 Molina Seca, 24 Molinier, Auguste, 169, 441 Molinos de Farquín, 38, 279 Molinos de la Acequia, 38 Mondéjar, Marqués de, 194–195, 266, 382, 383, 386, 388, 393, 400, 424, 448, 449 moneda de buena plata, 457 moneda de vellón, 457 moneda nueva, 457 Monforte, 38, 108–109, 278 Monóvar, 37, 447 Monreal, 197 Mont-de-Marsan, 220, 221 Montalbanejo, 359 Monteagudo, 58, 59, 271 Montemolín, 248 Montmélian, 178 Montpellier, 119, 146, 164, 165, 166, 167, 170, 171, 173, 187, 189, 228, 229, 230, 285, 288, 357, 416 Mora, 92, 252, 304

Morabán (fictional pagan king in Libro de los estados), 355 Morales, Ambrosio, 264 Moratalla, 379 Moret, Joseph de, 372, 429, 430, 453 Morón, 24, 25, 252 Mosse Abensuyem (Infante Manuel’s tax collector), 274 Moxó y Montoliu, Francisco de, 395 Moyar, 271 Muhammad Ibn Hud al-Dawla (taifa king of Murcia), 37 Muñó, 10–11, 13 Muño Díaz de Castañeda, 197–198 Muntaner, Ramon, 95, 98, 111, 112, 114, 164, 165, 170–171, 174, 198, 220, 272, 397, 423, 456 Muratori, Ludovico Antonio, 364, 425 Murcia, 11, 15, 16–19, 23–24, 29, 31, 37–38, 40, 41, 53, 54, 57, 58, 59, 60, 78, 90, 95, 96, 98, 103, 104, 105, 107, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116–118, 119, 120, 122, 127, 128, 130, 131, 132, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139–140, 141, 143, 145–148, 154, 162, 174, 185–186, 196, 199, 207, 209, 210, 216, 217, 218, 219, 223, 225, 229, 231, 232, 238, 244, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 256–259, 261, 263, 265, 267, 268, 271, 272, 281, 323, 324, 325, 329, 331, 333, 335, 338, 370, 379, 388, 397–398, 409, 414, 438, 442, 445–446, 447, 453 Murviedro, 214 Narbonne, 164, 222 Navarre, 39, 40, 41, 49, 50, 51, 76, 129, 134, 136, 144, 161, 162, 180, 181, 197, 198, 199, 202, 212, 254, 261, 279, 288, 415, 430, 431 Neblí, 196 Neuba, 267 Nicholas III, 204, 207

508 Index Nicolás Pérez (alcaide of Murcia), 270, 272 Niebla, 45, 46, 52, 55, 79, 94, 95, 99, 120, 252, 282 Nieto Soria, José Manuel, 429 Nodar, 252 Nogalte, 118 Norfolk, 83, 84, 85, 390 Norwich, 83 Notre Dame d’Aulps, abbey of, 270 Novelda, 38, 93, 95, 111, 112, 226, 244, 262, 263, 278, 346 Nublas, 12, 360, 362 Nunes, José Joaquim, 375 Núñez González de Lara, 150, 198, 203 Nuño González de Lara, 43, 47, 50, 121, 131, 144, 150, 155, 162, 166, 195, 198, 280, 283, 285, 418 Nuño Guillén de Guzmán (son of Guillén Pérez de Guzmán), 20, 32 Nuño Núñez (son of Nuño Pérez de Guzmán), 15, 37 Obregón Retortillo, Juan Ruiz de, 382 O’Callaghan, Joseph F., 45, 235, 355, 365, 366, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 380, 384, 386, 387, 389, 393, 395, 396, 398, 399, 403, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 422, 429, 433, 435, 437, 444, 445, 446, 449 Olmedo, 65, 161, 382 Ontur, 38, 118 Opizo (vassal of Infante Manuel), 167, 321 Order of Alcántara, 20, 37, 80, 151, 152, 247, 278, 293, 381 Order of Calatrava, 24, 25, 37, 100, 116, 122, 123, 139, 151, 152, 155, 156, 231, 239, 247, 248, 278, 283, 293, 307, 363, 384 Order of Santa María de España, 218, 239, 291

Order of Santiago, 18, 37, 38, 59, 85, 86, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 98, 108, 115, 118, 151, 152, 154, 218, 227, 230, 239, 242, 247, 248, 263, 264, 271, 273, 281, 282, 291, 293, 302, 304 Order of the Hospitallers, 152, 177, 247, 293 Order of the Temple, 152, 163, 247, 293 Ordoño Alvarez de Asturias, 18 Orduña, 49, 50, 51 Orihuela, 37, 58, 97, 105, 106, 107, 108, 112, 115, 116, 137, 149, 225, 231, 246, 252, 281, 305, 338, 448 Ornans, 183 Ortega, José Manuel, 387 Ortiz de Zúñiga, Diego, 15, 140, 360, 361, 386, 409 Osma, 79, 115, 194, 225, 257, 366, 376 Osuna, 100 Otto, Heinrich, 81, 380, 383, 385, 388 Otto IV of Burgundy, 184 Otto of Brunswick, 8 Otto of Wittelsbach, count palatine of Bavaria, 8 Ottobuono de Fieschi (cardinal deacon of St. Adrian), 85 Oviedo, 32, 81, 373, 387 Paio Gómez (master of Templars in Castile and León), 14 Palacios Martín, Bonifacio, 415 Palazuelos, 195, 226 Palencia, 3, 4, 11, 13, 17, 29, 30, 45, 123, 159, 252, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 278, 299, 367, 409, 416, 449 Palermo, 71, 254 Pampliega, 10, 13, 68, 195, 278 Pamplona, 134, 161, 162, 197, 202, 239, 256, 294, 430 Paravicini Bagliani, Agostino, 383, 392 Pardo Rodríguez, María Luisa, 416



Index 509

Paredes, Juan, 361 Paris, 25, 26, 34, 48, 83, 84, 270, 389, 420, 424, 431 Pasqual de Caparroso (settler in Santa María), 142 Payares, 437 Pays de Vaud, 270 Pedro Alfonso, conde de Barcelos, 5, 68, 243, 296 Pedro Alvarez (Infante Sancho’s mayordomo), 256 Pedro Aznárez (Aragonese nobleman), 15 Pedro Aznárez (cantor of Valladolid, escribano of Queen Violante), 15 Pedro d’Ambroa, 417 Pedro de Marsella, 208 Pedro Díaz, 197 Pedro d’Osca (Infante Manuel’s vassal), 305 Pedro Fernández de Pina, 118, 220, 335 Pedro Gómez (master of Templars in Castile and León), 15 Pedro Gómez Barroso, 118, 119, 139, 306 Pedro Gómez Descaño, 198 Pedro González (secretary of Alfonso X), 143 Pedro Guzmán, 20, 30, 107, 108, 113 Pedro I, king of Aragón, 16, 271 Pedro I, king of Castile, 5, 11, 275, 295, 296, 297 Pedro Ibáñez (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 125, 139, 273, 274, 309, 323, 324 Pedro Ibáñez (master of Order of Alcántara), 15 Pedro II, king of Aragón, 15, 174, 175, 228, 286, 415 Pedro III, king of Aragón, 27, 76, 97, 118, 119, 123, 174, 177, 180, 181, 196, 204, 205, 206, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 218,

220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 229, 230, 231, 232, 238, 239, 241, 254, 256, 266, 270, 286, 288, 290, 291, 292, 294, 330, 335, 337, 341, 367, 406, 415, 435, 438, 455 Pedro, Infante (son of Alfonso X), 169, 212, 216, 220, 222, 231, 234, 240, 241, 242, 245, 248, 252, 253, 257, 289, 292, 293, 294 Pedro, Infante (son of Pedro III of Aragón), 180 Pedro, Infante (son of Sancho IV), 230, 265 Pedro Jiménez de Calasanz, 143 Pedro Julião Rebolo, 196 Pedro López de Ayala (Infante Manuel’s ayo), 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 21, 29, 33, 278, 359, 360 Pedro Manrique, 198 Pedro Martínez, 69, 224 Pedro Martínez de Jovera, 69, 220, 273, 274, 322, 324, 325 Pedro Martínez de Pampliega, 68, 69 Pedro Maza III, lord of San Garrén, 16, 271 Pedro Núñez (master of Order of Santiago), 110, 218, 227, 248, 271 Pedro Núñez (vassal of Infante Manuel), 305 Pedro Núñez de Guzmán (son of Guillén Pérez de Guzmán), 15, 20, 32, 37 Pedro Núñez de Guzmán, 14 Pedro Pérez (knight commander of Segura), 18 Pedro Pérez (Queen Juana’s notary), 371 Pedro Pérez de Villanueva del Campo (Alfonso’s portero), 18 Pedro Ponce de Cabrera, 15 Pedro Ruiz de Olea (adelantado mayor de la Frontera), 16, 59

510 Index Pedro Ruiz de Olmos, 14 Pedro Ruiz Sarmiento, 17 Pedro Sánchez, 261 Pedro Sibiella or Ribiella, 14 Pedro Yoanex, 116 Peire Vidal, 9 Peiró Mateos, María del Carmen, 404 Pelay Pérez Correa, 37, 90, 91, 92, 98, 108, 115, 154, 155, 282, 283, 284, 413 Pelay Pérez de Asturias, 19 Pellicer de Ossau y Tovar, José, 354, 362 Peña de Águila, 118 Peñafiel, 38, 68, 122, 123, 155, 156, 206, 246, 253, 258, 259, 260, 263, 272, 273, 283, 295, 307, 316, 317, 343, 344, 397, 401, 416, 435, 450 Peñas de San Pedro, 118, 271 Pérard, Estienne, 386, 424 Pere Ladrón I, 16 Pere Ladrón II, 16 Pere Ladrón III, 16 Pere Salvany, 249 Pero Johan (vassal of Infante Manuel), 143, 415 Pero López (Infante Manuel’s falconer), 13 Pero López de Ayala (author and chronicler), 11, 13, 119 Pero Marín, 50, 53 Pero Pérez (son of Don Pérez), 310 Pero Royz de Olmos, 16 Perpignan, 164, 170, 187, 285, 427 Pertz, Georg Heinrich, 305, 380, 388 Peter II of Savoy, 175, 176, 178, 179, 180, 181, 183, 184, 186, 270, 287 Peters, Edward M., 431 Petit, Ernest, 424 Petrer, 95, 111, 112, 117, 231, 283, 397 Petrus Hispanus. See John XXI Philip I, Latin emperor of Constantinople, 232

Philip of Swabia (Infante Manuel’s maternal grandfather), 7, 8, 22 Philippa d’Anduze, 169 Philippe I of Savoy, 164, 175, 178, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 188, 270, 287, 425 Philippe II Augustus, king of France, 8 Philippe III, king of France, 161, 162, 169, 177, 186, 192, 197, 198, 199, 201, 202, 203, 207, 209, 211, 215, 220, 221, 222, 223, 229, 230, 239, 254, 288, 290, 291, 415, 419, 427, 431, 433, 439, 449 Philippe IV, king of France, 72, 197, 415 Phillips, William D., 117, 402 pie (agrarian measure), 365 Pierre de Chalon, 115, 182, 183, 184, 188, 189, 190, 229, 287, 424 Pierre Dubois, 72 Pierre II de Courtenay, 424 Pilas, 33 Pisa, 281 Planín, 363 Ponce Vela de Cabrera, 15 Pons Boigues, Francisco, 306 Pons de Saint-Just, bishop of Béziers, 419, 441 Ponz Carbonel (judicial magistrate of Murcia), 141 Potthast, August, 417, 418, 419, 425 Poveda Navarro, Antonio Manuel, 398, 405 Powicke, Frederick M., 380, 385, 423 Presilla, Maricel E., 440 Pretel Marín, Aurelio, 311, 325, 341, 342, 373, 377, 379, 396, 398, 399, 404, 406, 408, 409, 432, 447, 448 Priego, 250, 379 Primera Crónica General, 357, 359, 360, 361, 362, 364, 365, 371, 412 Procter, Evelyn S., 435, 436, 445



Index 511

Provence, 177 Puerto de Santa María, 47, 100, 235, 239 Quadrado, José María, 265 Quintana Prieto, Augusto, 374, 396 Rabat Algidit, 119 Rabat Zabazala, 118 Rades y Andrada, Francisco, 264, 267 Raimundo de Baró, 415 Ramiro Froilaz (descendant of a nephew of El Cid), 18 Ramon Berenguer IV, 174, 177, 179 Ramón de Palau, 227 Ramón I de Rocafull, 228, 229 Ramón II de Rocafull, 227, 228, 229, 230 Raymond VII, count of Toulouse, 174, 175, 176, 427 Raynaldi, Odorico, 388, 393, 394 Rebujena, 33 Rejín, 455 Remón de Puch Ferrer (settler in Cudiacibit), 142 Remondo de Losana, 6, 19, 20, 34, 35, 43, 65, 70, 74, 75, 78, 79, 80, 92, 154, 166, 167, 168, 203, 279, 282, 355, 370, 381, 394 Renier of Montferrat, 357 Requena, 95, 98, 157, 158, 171, 200, 215, 414 Revolution of 1868, 298 Rexín, 38 Rianzuela, 23 Ribera, Manuel M., 441 Riccardo di San Germano, 364 Richard de Clare, 84, 390, 441 Richard of Cornwall, 48, 63, 71, 75, 76, 77, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 86, 87, 88, 144, 175, 177, 180, 183, 185, 186, 286, 375, 380, 394, 421

Richard of Heslerton, 85 Ricot, 37 Riera i Melis, Antonio, 371 Ripart, Laurent, 422, 424 Rivera Garretas, Milagros, 304, 396, 454 Rivera Recio, Juan Francisco, 94 Robert de Cocfeld, 83 Robert I of Courtenay, Latin emperor of Constantinople, 183 Robert II, count of Artois, 197 Rodenberg, Karl, 365 Rodillas, 116 Rodolfo di Poggibonsi, 87, 303, 393 Rodrigo Alfonso (Infante Manuel’s uncle), 20, 47, 50 Rodrigo de Burgos, Fray, 259 Rodrigo el Franco, 129 Rodrigo Flores, 18, 30 Rodrigo Gómez de Galicia, 18, 30, 362 Rodrigo González Girón (Fernando III’s mayordomo), 15, 18, 20, 37, 59 Rodrigo Ibáñez (Infante Manuel’s scribe), 325, 333, 342, 344 Rodrigo Íñiguez (grand master, Order of Santiago), 37, 239 Rodrigo Jiménez de Luna, 218, 256, 334 Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada, 4, 11, 23, 25, 26, 299, 357, 358, 359, 365 Rodrigo Porcell, 118, 119, 143 Rodrigo Rodríguez, 155, 198 Rodrigo Sánchez de Arévalo, 69, 297 Rodríguez Campomanes, Pedro, 361 Rodríguez de Lama, Ildefonso, 302, 380, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 393, 456 Rodríguez Gil, Magdalena, 447 Rodríguez Llopis, Miguel, 379, 396, 398, 447 Rodríguez López, Amancio, 266, 309, 344, 358, 359, 366, 367, 439, 454 Roger de Heslerton, 83

512 Index Roger de Lauria, 220, 338 Roger II, king of Sicily, 7, 9 Roger III, king of Sicily, 7 Rolandino da Padova, 380 Romano, David, 443 Romeo of Villeneuve, 175 Romeu de Castellet, 159 Rota, 100 Royal Palace, Madrid, 21 Rubio García, Luis, 377 Rudolf of Habsburg, 158, 182, 183, 185, 186, 188, 189, 270, 284, 287 Ruiz Asencio, José Manuel, 452 Ruiz, Teófilo F, 437 Ruviales, 14 Ruxuxena Harat Aljena, 367 Ruy Ferrandes (vassal of Infante Manuel), 305 Rymer, Thomas, 299, 300, 366, 372, 373, 375, 376, 381, 383, 385, 389, 420, 422, 423, 426, 434, 439 Sabiote, 151 Sagarra, Fernando de, 400, 423 Sahagún, 45, 354 Saint Dinis, 390 Saint Eulalia, Friars of, 133, 265 Saint-Germain d’Auxerre, 270 Saint-Germain des Prés, 270 Saint-Germain-Du-Plain, 270 Saint-Germain-Les-Belles, 270 Saint Guérin or Gerin, 270 Saint Jean d’Aulps, 270 Saladin (first sultan of Egypt and Syria, founder of Ayyubid dynasty), 9 Salazar y Castro, Luis de, 12, 258, 271, 359, 360, 361, 362, 367, 371, 382, 397, 428, 446, 455 Salé, 89, 91, 99, 236, 282 Salimbene de Adam, 441 Salinas, 36, 37

Salinas de San Pedro del Pinatar, 267 Salins, 183, 185 Salmerón, Pasqual, 444 Saltés, 120 San Esteban de Gormaz, 95, 158, 225, 338, 365 San Juan del Arzobispo, chapel of, 260 San Pedro de Gumiel, monastery of, 14 San Pelayo de Cerrato, Premonstratensian monastery of, 3 San Torcaz, 94 San Vicente, monastery of, 224 San Zoilo, convent of, 353 Sancha de Aragón (daughter of Jaime I), 43 Sancha Guillén (daughter of Guillén de Alcalá, wife of Pere Ladrón III), 16 Sancha of Provence, 175, 177 Sánchez Albornoz, Claudio, 360 Sancho (illegitimate son of Infante Manuel), 266 Sancho, bishop of Coria, 14 Sancho de Aragón, archbishop of Toledo (Infante Manuel’s brotherin-law), 128, 150, 151, 154, 157, 170, 285, 396, 406, 407, 418 Sancho Domínguez, 34 Sancho García de Salcedo, 46 Sancho II, King of Portugal, 25, 198 Sancho, Infante (son of Alfonso X), 20, 34, 65, 69, 73, 80, 157, 171, 180, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 198, 199, 200, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207, 209, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 225, 226, 227, 231, 232, 234, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 268, 271, 272, 274, 286, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 295, 330, 338, 435



Index 513

Sancho, Infante, archbishop of Toledo (Infante Manuel’s brother), 4, 6, 11, 14, 20, 26, 31, 33, 40, 45, 48, 54, 55, 60, 63, 65, 71, 72, 74, 75, 80, 87, 89, 92, 93, 94, 125, 128, 358, 384, 387, 389, 394, 448, 449, 450 Sancho Íñiguez, 97, 98, 238, 239, 256, 282, 340 Sancho IV, king of Castile, 3, 10, 18, 21, 190, 194, 195, 200, 208, 230, 258, 260, 261, 265, 267, 272, 274, 275, 296, 327, 363, 449, 454 Sancho López (brother of Diego López II de Haro), 11 Sancho López, el Rato (younger brother of Pedro López de Ayala), 12 Sancho Martínez de Xódar, 59, 66, 70 Sancho Ruiz de Monesteruele, 270, 271 Sancho Sánchez de Mazuelo, 38, 269, 271 Sancho Vela, 310 Sancho Ximénez (Infante Manuel’s partitioner in Chinchilla), 341 Sancho Ximénez de Lanclares, 452 Sanctamera, 272 Sanlúcar, 23, 33, 100, 368 Santa Catarina, 118 Santa Lucía, convent of, 133, 265 Santa María, convent of, 353 Santa María de Alcocer, 60 Santa María de los Huertos, 79 Santa María de Villamayor, convent of, 224 Santa María del Puerto, church of, 228 Santa Olalla de Barcelona, convent of, 312 Santa Pola, 58, 59, 97, 102, 122, 124, 159, 221, 226, 238, 281, 305 Santa Trinidad, parish of, 260 Santaella, 101 Santo Domingo (Dominican convent, Madrid), 353

Santo Domingo de Guzmán, 278 Santo Domingo de la Calzada, 158 Santo Domingo de Silos, 14, 49, 50 Sarasona, 128, 259, 309 Sardina, Patrizia, 441 Saurina de Bedes (aya of Constanza de Aragón), 43 Sauveterre-de-Béarn, 199, 432 Sax, 36, 37, 117, 244, 283 Segovia, 6, 24, 25, 34, 56, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 87, 123, 156, 157, 204, 205, 206, 207, 209, 247, 248, 257, 296, 355, 365, 368, 369, 370, 372, 377, 385, 387, 413, 414, 424, 435, 436 Segura River, 41, 137, 284 Señorío de Villena, 101, 289 Serpa, 252 Serra Ruiz, Rafael, 362 Serrano, Luciano, 354, 355, 366, 394, 442 Servion, Jehan, 176, 179, 184, 185, 424, 425 Seville, 159, 283 Sibilia de Palau, 227 Sibilia, Salvatore, 389 Sicily, 7, 8, 60, 61, 65, 75, 76, 85, 139, 182, 211, 233, 238, 241, 254, 287 Siege of Balaguer, 218, 334 Siege of Seville, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 42, 90 Sierra de Segura, 37 Sigüenza, 54, 79 Simón Ruiz de los Cameros, 144, 197, 200, 202, 203, 243, 289 Siste, 24 Sixth Crusade, 9 Snellgrove, Harold S., 390 Socovos, 379 Soldevila, Ferran, 119, 205, 357, 397, 400, 401, 403, 416, 434 Soler García, José María, 407 Solobrar, 261

514 Index Solúcar Albayda, 140, 409 Soria, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 76, 89, 151, 225, 254, 280, 281, 368, 395 St. Germain-de-Prés, 391 St. John ad Portam Latinam, 234, 448 St. Peter’s Church, Cockfield, 83 Suero Pérez, bishop of Zamora, 80 Suffolk, 83, 84, 85, 390 Swabia, 7, 8, 22, 23, 28, 56, 60, 61, 187 Sybille d’Anduze, 174, 176, 427 Tahúlla, 402, 406 Talavera, 251, 256, 257 Tanner, Thomas, 85, 392 Tarascon, 416 Tarazona, 45, 131, 132, 212, 225, 227, 254, 434, 438, 439 Tardajos, 224, 354 Tarifa, 147, 165, 187, 201, 284 Tartars, 83 Tasso, Torquato, 356 Tate, Robert B., 427 Tejada, 363, 368 Tello de Meneses, bishop of Palencia, 299 Teresa Garciaz, 14 Teresa Gil (consort of Alfonso IX, king of León), 18 Teresa Gil de Vidaure (consort of Jaime I), 16, 129, 144 Teresa Pérez de Braganza (wife of Infante Alfonso de Molina), 354 Teresa Rodríguez Girón (wife of Ponce Vela de Cabrera), 15 Thibault (son of Henry I of Navarre), 150, 161 Thibault I, king of Navarre, 39, 279 Thibault II, king of Navarre, 39, 40, 50, 51, 53, 54, 134, 135, 136, 279, 280 Thomas (prior of Hurley), 300 Thomas I, marquess of Saluzzo, 176, 189, 222, 270, 287

Thomas I of Savoy, 164, 173, 174, 179 Thomas II of Savoy, 85, 175, 178, 179, 181, 184, 185, 186 Thomas III of Savoy, 184, 185, 186, 222, 223, 270, 425 Tierra de Don Manuel, 36, 58, 59, 89, 115, 133, 196, 200, 281, 289, 370 Tilander, Gunnar, 439 Tiñosa, castle of, 231, 267 Tlemcen, 148, 159 Tobarra, 37 Toda (sister of García Fernández), 69, 224 Toda de Santa Gadea, 257 Toda Ladrón, 143, 144 Toledo, 4, 11, 14, 20, 25, 26, 28, 33, 40, 65, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, 88, 89, 90, 92, 94, 99, 109, 116, 119, 128, 130, 148, 150, 151, 153, 158, 191, 193, 194, 209, 210, 213, 227, 228, 229, 230, 234, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 246, 247, 249, 251, 253, 260, 288, 299, 306, 353, 360, 363, 373, 374, 381, 384, 385, 386, 387, 394, 396, 397, 398, 399, 402, 424, 431, 436, 439, 443, 447 Tordesillas, 252 Toro, 10, 255, 272, 451 Torre de Alpechín, 38, 279 Torre de la Presa, 93 Torre del Rey, 34 Torrecilla, 118 Torres Fontes, Juan, 35, 60, 97, 98, 113, 114, 116, 143, 225, 229, 259, 266, 272, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 311, 312, 313, 314, 322, 323, 324, 326, 332, 334, 339, 359, 362, 368, 370, 371, 372, 375, 377, 378, 379, 389, 394, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 417, 426, 436, 437, 440, 442, 443, 444, 445, 448, 449, 452, 453, 454, 455, 456 Totana, 59, 281



Index 515

Toulouse, 337 Tourtoulon, Charles de, 401, 421 Toviella, 3 Treaties of Vitoria, 199 Treaty: of Ágreda, 225, 263; of Alcalá de Benzayde, 153, 158; of Alcaraz, 37, 402; of Almizra, 37, 78, 101, 104, 114, 200, 216; of Ariza, 258; of Badajoz, 403; of Campillo, 224, 225, 263; of Monteagudo, 258; of Orleans, 197, 415; of Torrellas, 111, 112 Trestamar, 362 Treviño, 202 Triana, 23, 24 Tucio Benardi, 79 Tunis, 89, 90, 134, 135, 139 Tunisia, 238 Turbidal, 142 Úbeda, 4, 151 Ubieto Arteta, Agustín, 387 Uceda, 204, 439 Uclés, 89, 90, 115, 263, 264, 273, 365, 371, 444 Ulloa y Golfín, Pedro de, 381, 411 Urban II, 356 Urban IV, 79, 80, 86, 195, 385, 393 Urbión, 151 Urgel, 171 Urraca (illegitimate daughter of Alfonso IX), 12 Urraca (sister of García Fernández), 69, 224 Urraca García (wife of Pedro Núñez de Guzmán), 14 Urraca García (daughter of Doña Toda), 224, 225, 354 Urraca García (daughter of García Fernández), 4, 224 Urraca López (wife of Fernando II of León), 11 Utrilla Utrilla, Juan F., 362, 455

Vajay, Szabolcs de, 357 Val de Miège, 183 Val d’Isère, 185 Valencia, 15, 36, 41, 45, 47, 51, 52, 54, 55, 57, 78, 79, 103, 114, 117, 118, 119, 128, 132, 136, 143, 157, 163, 171, 196, 208, 210, 213, 214, 215, 216, 218, 220, 221, 223, 225, 228, 230, 238, 241, 256, 284, 329, 331, 334, 336, 337, 384, 387, 409, 416, 434, 435, 438, 444, 453 Valencia de León, castle of, 254 Valladolid, 5, 30, 45, 46, 52, 63, 65, 79, 160, 195, 206, 215, 218, 231, 240, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 253, 255, 289, 292, 326, 363, 435, 448 Valle de Ayora, 37, 118, 129, 224, 225, 227, 263, 283, 292 Vaucluse, 427 Vázquez Campos, Braulio, 362, 382 Vejer, 100, 147, 148 Vela Ladrón de Guevara, 198 Velazquez de Figueroa, Fr. Vicente, 363 Vellisca, 261 Vellisquilla, 261 Vergara, 127 Verlinden, Charles, 402 Ves, 139, 244, 293 vezindat, 125, 140, 199, 308, 323, 401 Viana, 162 Vicena, 12 Vicente Ybáñez (magistrate of San Bartolomé), 141 Vierne de Chateauneuf, 174 Vigil, Ciriaco Miguel, 367, 373 Villa de Caleruega, 115 Villa Real, 166, 213, 417 Villacienzo, 258, 344 Villaescusa de Haro, 92 Villafranca de Penedès, 416 Villahermanos, 363 Villalcázar de Sirga, 163

516 Index Villaldemiro, 10, 13 Villalmuño, 13, 278 Villamayor de los Montes, 224 Villamediana, 3 Villanueva, Jaime, 384 Villaquirán de los Infantes, 13, 358 Villardompedro, 15 Villena, 36, 41, 103, 104, 105, 108, 109, 117, 123, 125, 133, 134, 200, 216, 219, 226, 244, 249, 252, 262, 283, 289, 311, 322, 326, 327, 331, 335, 341, 342, 379, 396, 398, 406, 408 Víñez Sánchez, Antonia, 371 Violante (wife of Alfonso X), 15, 36, 41, 43, 51, 89, 100, 106, 107, 110, 128, 143, 150, 156, 157, 158, 164, 170, 183, 187, 204, 205, 210, 212, 215, 219, 228, 231, 240, 243, 280, 285, 289, 290, 292, 368, 418, 437 Violante (daughter of Alfonso X), 150, 186, 246 Violante (daughter of Infante Manuel), 262, 281, 283, 285 Violante of Hungary (second wife of Jaime I), 40, 43, 44, 265, 423, 424 Virgin Mary, 9, 26, 60, 111, 158, 205, 239, 418 Viterbo, 387, 394, 399, 436 Vitoria, 49, 50, 127, 134, 135, 198, 199, 200, 201, 221, 231, 242, 288, 431, 447 Vizcaya, 278 von Schoen, Wilhelm Freiherr, 385 Vuillafans, 183 Walter de Rogate, 75, 88 Wenceslas, king of Bohemia, 8 Westminster, 81, 389, 390, 391, 426 Wexler, William, 392 William of Holland, 61 William of Savoy, 164, 175

William of St. Amour, 83 William of Valentia, 84 William VII, marquess of Montferrat, 138, 157, 169, 174, 176, 179, 185, 186, 189, 222, 241, 270, 286, 287, 419 Wilshire, Leland E., 420 Winkelmann, Eduard, 64, 302, 364, 393, 422 Woodstock, 389 Wurstemberger, Johann Ludwig, 422 Wyckoff, Dorothy, 25 Xilibar, 58 Ximen López, 270, 272 Yanguas y Miranda, José, 150, 202, 430, 433 Yecla, 129, 219, 245, 334, 335, 455 Yolande de Brienne (queen of crusader state of Jerusalem, Infante Manuel’s first cousin), 8, 60, 61 Yolande de Courtenay, 424 Yolande de Hainaut, 424 Yucef Abennihas, 210 yugada, 12 yzf, 237 Zaad Albalenci, 118 Zag de la Malea, 214, 219, 290, 291 Zamora, 80, 194, 255 Záncara River, 92 zenetes, 108 Zeugom Abobedy, 118, 119 Zurita, Jerónimo, 53, 56, 57, 196, 205, 206, 228, 255, 258, 260, 267, 270, 271, 272, 362, 370, 372, 373, 374, 377, 378, 382, 400, 401, 417, 420, 423, 426, 429, 433, 443, 448, 450, 452, 453, 455, 456

Toronto Iberic

co-editors: Robert Davidson (Toronto) and Frederick A. de Armas (Chicago) editorial board: Josiah Blackmore (Harvard); Marina Brownlee (Princeton); Anthony J. Cascardi (Berkeley); Justin Crumbaugh (Mt Holyoke); Emily Francomano (Georgetown); Jordana Mendelson (NYU); Joan Ramon Resina (Stanford); Enrique Garcia Santo-Tomás (U Michigan); Kathleen Vernon (SUNY Stony Brook) 1 Anthony J. Cascardi, Cervantes, Literature, and the Discourse of Politics 2 Jessica A. Boon, The Mystical Science of the Soul: Medieval Cognition in Bernardino de Laredo’s Recollection Method 3 Susan Byrne, Law and History in Cervantes’ Don Quixote 4 Mary E. Barnard and Frederick A. de Armas (eds.), Objects of Culture in the Literature of Imperial Spain 5 Nil Santiáñez, Topographies of Fascism: Habitus, Space, and Writing in Twentieth-Century Spain 6 Nelson Orringer, Lorca in Tune with Falla: Literary and Musical Interludes 7 Ana M. Gómez-Bravo, Textual Agency: Writing Culture and Social Networks in Fifteenth-Century Spain 8 Javier Irigoyen-García, The Spanish Arcadia: Sheep Herding, Pastoral Discourse, and Ethnicity in Early Modern Spain 9 Stephanie Sieburth, Survival Songs: Conchita Piquer’s Coplas and Franco’s Regime of Terror 10 Christine Arkinstall, Spanish Female Writers and the Freethinking Press, 1879–1926

11 Margaret Boyle, Unruly Women: Performance, Penitence, and Punishment in Early Modern Spain 12 Evelina Gužauskytė, Christopher Columbus’s Naming in the diarios of the Four Voyages (1492–1504): A Discourse of Negotiation 13 Mary E. Barnard, Garcilaso de la Vega and the Material Culture of Renaissance Europe 14 William Viestenz, By the Grace of God: Francoist Spain and the Sacred Roots of Political Imagination 15 Michael Scham, Lector Ludens: The Representation of Games and Play in Cervantes 16 Stephen Rupp, Heroic Forms: Cervantes and the Literature of War 17 Enrique Fernandez, Anxieties of Interiority and Dissection in Early Modern Spain 18 Susan Byrne, Ficino in Spain 19 Patricia M. Keller, Ghostly Landscapes: Film, Photography, and the Aesthetics of Haunting in Contemporary Spanish Culture 20 Carolyn A. Nadeau, Food Matters: Alonso Quijano’s Diet and the Discourse of Food in Early Modern Spain 21 Cristian Berco, From Body to Community: Venereal Disease and Society in Baroque Spain 22 Elizabeth R. Wright, The Epic of Juan Latino: Dilemmas of Race and Religion in Renaissance Spain 23 Ryan D. Giles, Inscribed Power: Amulets and Magic in Early Spanish Literature 24 Jorge Pérez, Confessional Cinema: Religion, Film, and Modernity in Spain’s Development Years (1960–1975) 25 Joan Ramon Resina, Josep Pla: Seeing the World in the Form of Articles 26 Javier Irigoyen-García, “Moors Dressed as Moors”: Clothing, Social Distinction, and Ethnicity in Early Modern Iberia 27 Jean Dangler, Edging toward Iberia 28 Ryan D. Giles and Steven Wagschal (eds.), Beyond Sight: Engaging the Senses in Iberian Literatures and Cultures, 1200–1750 29 Silvia Bermúdez, Rocking the Boat: Migration and Race in Contemporary Spanish Music 30 Hilaire Kallendorf, Ambiguous Antidotes: Virtue as Vaccine for Vice in Early Modern Spain 31 Leslie Harkema, Spanish Modernism and the Poetics of Youth: From Miguel de Unamuno to La Joven Literatura 32 Benjamin Fraser, Cognitive Disability Aesthetics: Visual Culture, Disability Representations, and the (In)Visibility of Cognitive Difference 33 Robert Patrick Newcomb, Iberianism and Crisis: Spain and Portugal at the Turn of the Twentieth Century

34 Sara J. Brenneis, Spaniards in Mauthausen: Representations of a Nazi Concentration Camp, 1940–2015 35 Silvia Bermúdez and Roberta Johnson (eds.), A New History of Iberian Feminisms 36 Steven Wagschal, Minding Animals in the Old and New Worlds: A Cognitive Historical Analysis 37 Heather Bamford, Cultures of the Fragment: Uses of the Iberian Manuscript, 1100–1600 38 Enrique Garcia Santo-Tomás (ed.), Science on Stage in Early Modern Spain 39 Marina Brownlee (ed.), Cervantes’ Persiles and the Travails of Romance 40 Sarah Thomas, Inhabiting the In-Between: Childhood and Cinema in Spain’s Long Transition 41 David A. Wacks, Medieval Iberian Crusade Fiction and the Mediterranean World 42 Rosilie Hernández, Immaculate Conceptions: The Power of the Religious Imagination in Early Modern Spain 43 Mary Coffey and Margot Versteeg (eds.), Imagined Truths: Realism in Modern Spanish Literature and Culture 44 Diana Aramburu, Resisting Invisibility: Detecting the Female Body in Spanish Crime Fiction 45 Samuel Amago and Matthew J. Marr (eds.), Consequential Art: Comics Culture in Contemporary Spain 46 Richard P. Kinkade, Dawn of a Dynasty: The Life and Times of Infante Manuel of Castile