Full text of "Jiménez de Cisneros : on the threshold of Spain's Golden Age"

See other formats

Jimenez de Cisneros:

On the Threshold of
Spain's Golden Age

Medieval and Renaissance
Texts and Studies

Volume 212

Renaissance Masters 3

Richard J. Schoeck
General Editor

Jimenez de Cisneros:

On the Threshold of
Spain's Golden Age

Erika Rummel

Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies

Tempe, Arizona

1999

A generous grant from

The Program for Cultural Cooperation Between

Spain's Ministry of Culture and United States' Universities

has assisted in meeting the publication costs of this volume.

® Copyright 1999
Arizona Board of Regents for Arizona State University

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Rummel, Erika, 1942-

Jimenez de Cisneros : on the threshold of Spain's Golden Age / by
Erika Rummel.

p. cm. — (Medieval & Renaissance texts & studies; v. 212. Renais-
sance masters ; 3)

Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN 0-86698-254-X (alk. paper)

1. Jimanez de Cisneros, Francisco, 1436.^-1517. 2. Spain — History —
Ferdinand and Isabella, 1479-1516. 3. Statesmen— Spain— Biography. 4. Car-
dinals—Spain— Biography. I. Title, n. Medieval & Renaissance Texts &
Studies (Series) ; v. 212. HI. Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies
(Series). Renaissance masters ; 3.
DP166.X5 R86 1999
946.03~dc21 99-054901

This book is made to last.

It is set in Garamond,

smythe-sewn, and printed on acid-free paper

to library specifications.

Printed in the United States of America

Table of Contents

Preface vii

Chapter One

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 1

Chapter Two

Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform 18

Chapter Three

Crusader, Missionary, and Guardian of the Faith 29

Chapter Four

The University of Alcala and the Complutensian Polyglot 53
Chapter Five

Cisneros and the Politics of Spain, 1492-1516 66

Chapter Six

The Second Regency, 1516-1517 79

Chapter Seven

The Final Months 95

Chapter Eight

The Image of the Cardinal 108

Literature Cited 119

Appendix 1

The Constitution of San Ildefonso College 125

Appendix 2

An Anonymous Life of Cardinal Cisneros 137

Index 145

w («

2 ~ I

■< JS -<

2 ;q

>* ^

"2 '^

C 00

c«

e
«

«• ^-.

"5 ^

a '^

< '".

<«

^ -o

o —

I- 2 2

B ^

S|2

a "^
■ := c

^ I 5

"^ ^ :d

tt. O

c g-S

•2.2 <
E "o

.2 E -4>

. C i« 3

^ 1 S

— • :3 an

•r E

.. C B

- U Q

E 'o

■c .2 2

-s:i.|

^ I a

B S »•
i« M 3
B 9 ^

^ < ^

-2 c
2 £

— M

O. 60

B f^

H LA

E =

S B

3 .i^

J2 o

7 P

— X

u
a

S =
« 2
Q. E ^

"^ c2 "^

60 ±-

B O

5 ac

2 -^ I J? ^ ^

— o 2

LiJlll

«« o 2 2
^ (2 bu u.

If— J

< <

■c

»iM

•7

«-^

*<^

dr ^2

#^ I

I II—

b 0

5 <

w ' — * w

H C *^

g •s

O «N o

.2^5
J3 < 3

^ E^

Preface

it is indicative of the dearth of English Hterature on Cisneros' life
that a recent publication cites as "the most judicious account" a
chapter in a Spanish book on Erasmus (M. Bataillon's Erasmo y Es-
pana, Mexico 1966, cited by Bentley, p. 70). Similarly, an entry on
Cisneros in a biographical dictionary [Contemporaries of Erasmus: A
Biographical Register of the Renaissance and Reformation, Toronto 1986)
lists three biographies, respeaively dating from 1851 (by Hefele, written
in German, available in English translation), 1914 (by Lyell, in English),
and 1930 (by Fernandez de Retana, in Spanish). The most recent bi-
ography in English is W. Starkie's Grand Inquisitor: Being an Account of
Cardinal Ximenez de Cisneros and His Times (London, 1940). Clearly,
there is a lack of biographies for English readers. In Spanish litera-
ture, by contrast, Cisneros has received a great deal of attention. A
plethora of books and articles has appeared in the last twenty years,
ranging from Cruz Martinez Esteruelas' popular paperback, Cisne-
ros, de presidario a rey (Barcelona, 1992) to Jose Garcia Oro's schol-
arly study, El Cardenal Cisneros (2 volumes, Madrid, 1992-93). The
majority of these publications are, however, meant for specialists.
Garcia Oro's book provides an account that covers the full scope of
Cisneros' activities, but it assumes a thorough knowledge of the peri-
od and is burdened with minute detail. For an undergraduate reader-
ship it is labyrinthine. Other Spanish accounts deal with specific as-
pects of Cisneros' career, most often related to his activities as a
churchman. In an earlier work, Cisneros y la reforma del clero espanol
. . . (Madrid, 1971) Garcia Oro addresses Cisneros' reform pro-
gramme; P. Sainz Rodriguez treats of the same subject, with particu-
lar attention to Cisneros' inclination to mysticism, in La siembra mis-
tica del Cardenal Cisneros y las reformas en la iglesia (Madrid, 1979).
The most recent collection of papers dedicated exclusively to Cis-
neros is La hora de Cisneros, edited by Joseph Perez (Madrid, 1995).

viii Preface

Individual aspects of the Cardinal's career are also discussed in
recent English literature. His foundation of the University of Alcala
and his patronage of learning are the subject of chapters in Jeremy
Bentley's Humanists and Holy Writ (Princeton, 1983) and Basil Hall's
Humanists and Protestants, 1500-1900 (Edinburgh, 1990). His religious
zeal and his missionary spirit are discussed by L. Harvey in Islamic
Spain: 1250-1500 (Chicago, 1990) and by A. Hamilton in Heresy and
Mysticism in Sixteenth-Century Spain: The alumbrados (Toronto, 1993).

As for original sources documenting Cisneros' career, English
readers are left almost without recourse. Neither the sixteenth-cen-
tury biographies by Gomez and Vallejo, nor the correspondence of
Cisneros and his secretaries, nor the numerous documents relating to
his office as Inquisitor General and to his foundation of the Univer-
sity of Alcala have been translated into English. John Olin's English
version of Cisneros' preface to the Complutensian Polyglot (in
Catholic Reformation from Cardinal Ximenes to the Council of Trent,
1495-1563, New York, 1990) and the references to Cisneros in Barto-
lome de las Casas, History of the Indies (trans. A. Collard, New York,
1971) are notable exceptions. My book is an attempt to fill an obvi-
ous gap and provide English readers with a concise account of Cisne-
ros' life, acquainting them with the principal aspects of his career as
a statesman, reformer, missionary, and patron of learning.

The spelling of Cisneros' name needs a brief explanation. In the
sources and in modern literature we find several variants. Cisneros'
baptismal name was Gonzalo, which he changed to Francisco after
entering the Franciscan order. His last name appears in several Span-
ish variants: Ximenez, Ximenes, Jimenez, or Jimenes de Cisneros.
The Latin form is: Franciscus Ximenius Cisnerius. Except in quota-
tions, which reproduce the spelling of the source, I have used the
form "]'\mtnez de Cisneros", the choice of the majority of modern
Spanish scholars.

I gratefully acknowledge the financial support of Wilfrid Laurier
University, which allowed me to consult the holdings of libraries and
archives in Madrid and London. I also wish to thank Prof. Jocelyn
Hillgarth, who read an early draft of the manuscript and from whose
advice I have greatly benefited, to the readers of MRTS, and to the
copyeditor. Dr. Leslie S. B. MacCoull.

Erika Rummel
Wilfrid Laurier University

Spain in the Time of Cisneros

v_>ardinal Cisneros' life coincided with a dynamic period in Spanish
history, the reign of Ferdinand and Isabel. The rule of the "Catholic
Monarchs," as they were entitled, ushered in a golden age, a period
of consolidation and expansion that saw the emergence of powerful
economic and cultural forces. Modern historians regard Cisneros as
one of the chief agents in this process. "There was as much of acci-
dent as of design," John Elliott writes of the emerging Spanish em-
pire, "but in so far as it can be attributed to any particular policies,
they were those of Ferdinand and of Cardinal Cisneros" (Elliott,
Spain, 130).

Territorial Expansion

The Iberian peninsula, bordered on three sides by the sea and
separated from the rest of Europe by the Pyrenees, is a well-defined
geographic unit. In Roman times, it was an administrative unit as
well. Conquered in the third century B.C., it was eventually incorpo-
rated into the Roman Empire as a province, called "Hispania". Medi-
eval authors continued to refer to the peninsula by this name al-
though it was by the thirteenth century divided into several political
units: Portugal on the west coast, Castile occupying a broad swath in
the centre, the Crown of Aragon on the east coast, the small king-
dom of Navarre in the mountainous north, and Muslim Granada in
the south.

Castile occupied by far the largest and most densely populated
area, commanding four times the territory and six times the popula-
tion of its nearest competitor, neighbouring Aragon. The two king-
doms were ruled by two branches of the house of Trastamara. In
1464 Henry IV of Castile, who had no legitimate heir, designated his
half-sister Isabel as successor to the throne. The eighteen-year-old
princess immediately became the centre of dynastic speculations. The

2 Spain in the Time of Cisneros

princes of Portugal, France, and Aragon vied for her hand. After pro-
longed negotiations in an atmosphere of court intrigue, she was mar-
ried to Ferdinand, crown prince of Aragon. The marriage contract,
signed in 1469, united the two branches of the house and paved the
way for expansion. The dynastic marriages arranged in the next gen-
eration resulted in an association of Castile and Aragon with the
Habsburgs in Austria and Burgundy. The royal couple's grandson,
Charles V, united a vast empire in his person as Archduke of Bur-
gundy, King of Spain, and from 1519 German Emperor. Spanish
power also extended to Italy. Sardinia and Sicily had for some time
been in the hands of the house of Aragon, and military conquest
added to these the kingdom of Naples. Portugal, also linked by mar-
riage with the Spanish crown, was annexed by Charles' son, Philip II.
Much of the territorial expansion that took place from 1469 to
1580 under the Catholic Monarchs and their successors Charles V (as
Spanish King, Charles I) and Philip II was due to marriage politics;
the remainder was the result of military exploits. On the Spanish
peninsula itself, a successful expedition against Granada resulted in
the fall of this last Muslim enclave. The victorious campaign (1482-
92), which had the character of a crusade and was part of the historic
reconquista ("reconquest"), ended eight centuries of Muslim occupa-
tion. Soon, however, Spanish ambitions reached beyond Europe. The
exploration and aggressive colonization of the Americas made Spain
a world power. There was a sense of imperial mission and a belief in
Spanish superiority, not only over the natives in the newly discov-
ered territories, but also over other European states. The pride and
the political aspirations of Spain are expressed by Elio Antonio Ne-
brija, royal historian under Ferdinand and Isabel. "Though the title
of 'Empire' belongs to Germany, real power is in the hands of the
Spanish monarchs who, masters of a large part of Italy and the
Mediterranean, carry war to Africa and send out their ships, follow-
ing the course of the stars, to the isles of the Indies and the New
World" (Kamen, Spain, 9). Spain's political ambitions did not go
unchallenged, however, and prompted complaints that the Castilians,
in particular, thought "they alone were descended from heaven and
the rest of mankind was mud" (Elliott, World, 8-9). For a time, at
any rate, Spanish aggression remained unchecked. The overthrow of
the Aztecs and Incas by the conquistadores and the colonization of
the "Indies" relieved the pressing need at home for more land and

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 3

resources and brought enormous wealth to Spain in the form of
precious metals and other commodities that were scarce in Europe.

The achievements of the Catholic Monarchs have lost some of
their lustre in the eyes of modern historians, who question the ethics
of colonization, the imposition of European cultural values on the
native population in the Americas, and the religious intolerance and
racial discrimination that led to the persecution, forcible conversion,
and expulsion of Jews and Muslims at home. In their own time,
however, Ferdinand and Isabel were national icons and, being associ-
ated with an era of glory in Spain, have remained heroes of popular
history. As noted by the distinguished Spanish historian Ramon
Menendez Pidal, the rule of the Catholic Monarchs "represents for
all Spaniards a happy golden age, remembered nostalgically as incom-
parable" (Menendez Pidal, Spain, 402). Similarly the nineteenth-cen-
tury American historian William Prescott observes that Spaniards in
his day "seem willing to draw a veil over [Isabel's] errors or to ex-
cuse them by charging them to the age in which she lived" (Prescott,
Ferdinand and Isabella, I:248n). Indeed Angel Rodriguez Sanchez,
the author of the standard handbook, Historia de Espana (111:403),
minimizes criticism of Ferdinand and Isabel, reducing it to a question
of ideology. In weighing the merit of their policies, he says, histori-
ans tend to choose the interpretation best suited to their own intel-
lectual leanings.

Consolidation of Authority

The authority of the monarchs, described as podeno real absoluto,
"absolute royal power," in Isabel's will, was shored up by a number
of important administrative and constitutional changes. The royal
couple had inherited a loose confederation of regions with their own
assemblies {cortes), laws, military forces, and systems of taxation. The
crown's interests were represented in each region by a viceroy, often
a member of the royal family, who was advised by regional councils.
The monarch thus was "the sovereign of each [country] rather than
king of all," as Solorzano Pereira, the seventeenth-century jurist and
historian, observed {CMH, 322). The Catholic Kings worked toward
centralizing the system of government. In many ways Spain is a text-
book case for the political developments that characterize the Renais-
sance, illustrating the gradual substitution of the sovereign state for
the feudal monarchy that dominated the Middle Ages. Although the

4 Spain in the Time of Cisneros

authority of the Spanish monarchs fluctuated and encountered spo-
radic aristocratic resistance, the tide ran in their favour. They consol-
idated their authority first of all by creating an effective system of
taxation. Once they had established a solid financial base, they no
longer needed the endorsement of the cortes at every step. Equally
important was the policy of administrative centralization pursued by
the monarchs. The independent spirit of municipal councils was
curbed, and their actions monitored by corregidores, officials appoint-
ed by the Crown. The revival and adaptation of medieval brother-
hoods (hermandades) did much to restore peace and order to the
countryside. Maintained by local taxes, the hermandades combined
the functions of a police force and a tribunal and had the power to
quell rebellion, prosecute serious crimes such as rape, murder, arson,
and robbery, and administer speedy justice. Commerce and trade
benefited from these security measures. The monarchs also tightened
control over the administration by assigning posts and magistracies
to civil servants, often drawn from the legal profession. Unlike mem-
bers of the nobility, these jurists (letrados) had no resources of their
own and were dependent on the favour of the crown. The monarchs
increased their income significantly by revoking grants made to the
nobility, by assuming control of the wealthy military orders of
Alcantara, Calatrava, and Santiago, and using the newly acquired
power and resources to further their own mercantilist policies.

A significant characteristic of Ferdinand's and Isabel's rule was
their personal involvement in the process of government. They
supervised projects initiated by them and followed their progress
from inception to completion, ensuring the implementation of the
proposed measures. They were ever present to their subjects, an ac-
tive and visible force injecting meaning into the traditional concept
of a divinely instituted monarchy.

Crown and Church

The Catholic Kings derived considerable benefit also from their
carefully negotiated relationship with the Church. Their concern was
to achieve national control over ecclesiastical appointments and
jurisdiction and effectively restrict the taxes paid to Rome. The
church in the fifteenth century was a state within a state. The privi-
leges of the clergy were far-reaching. They were exempt from taxes
and from secular jurisdiction. The prelates of the church controlled

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 5

enormous wealth and in many cases exploited their temporal power.
The church thus posed a serious challenge to the Crown's rights and
prerogatives. It was a major diplomatic success when Pope Sixtus IV
gave Spain a say in the appointment of prelates. In 1482 the Crown
obtained the right of "supplicating" or petitioning in favour of its
candidate. Another opportunity to bargain for power arose after the
reconquest of Granada. In 1486 the Crown was rewarded for return-
ing the province to the Christian fold by a papal bull granting it the
right of appointing candidates to ecclesiastical office in Granada. This
was also the model and precedent that shaped the Crown's role with
respect to the Church in the New World. Pope Alexander VI,
himself a Spaniard, formally divided the Americas between Portugal
and Spain, granting them political authority over the designated areas
and delegating to them the task of Christianizing the inhabitants,
collecting tithes, and nominating candidates for ecclesiastical offices.
These privileges were confirmed and expanded by Pope Julius II,
who needed Spain's military aid against the French invaders. It is a
measure of the control the Crown had achieved over the church that
in 1514 it was able to pass a decree forbidding publication of any
papal bull in Spain without royal approval.

Although the negotiations between the Crown and the Holy See
were no doubt motivated by political and economic considerations,
the interest of the monarchs was not confined to them. Isabel, in
particular, was a devout Christian and solicitous for the spiritual
welfare of the Church. Calls for reform had become increasingly
more prominent in Europe during the fifteenth century, and in 1494
the pope gave the Catholic Kings full powers to reform the religious
orders in Spain. It was a difficult task both on account of the number
of monasteries involved and the entrenched nature of the abuses to
be corrected. As we shall see, Cisneros emerged as one of the leaders
of monastic reform. His energetic pursuit of the matter was instru-
mental in implementing the royal plans.

The endeavours of the monarchs to reform the church were soon
extended beyond the religious orders to the secular clergy and the
population at large. The Inquisition played an important role in
efforts to purge the realm of unorthodox thought. The institution
itself was not new, but its direction was. Medieval boards of inquisi-
tion had been subject to the authority of the local bishop, but a papal
bull issued by Sixtus IV in 1478 put the monarchs at the head of the

6 Spain in the Time of Cisneros

Inquisition. Concerned at first with the enforcement of CathoHc
practices among converted Jews and MusHms, the Suprema, as the
Spanish Inquisition was called, soon turned into a powerful instru-
ment of state control. The line between political and religious
spheres was blurred in a society in which religious practices dominat-
ed every aspect of life and in which a common religion to some
extent substituted for political unity. The Crown was not slow to
exploit the obvious advantages of the interaction between the two
spheres. The Spanish Inquisition, then, became an ecclesiastical
institution controlled by a secular agency. The Crown supervised the
appointment of inquisitors (Cisneros among them) and ensured that
the confiscated property of those condemned by the Inquisition went
toward the financing of its bureaucracy. This was an unhealthy state
of things, as noted in the petition of a converse pleading with Charles
V in 1538: "Your Majesty should provide that the expenses of the
Holy Office do not come from the property of the condemned
because it is a repugnant thing that the inquisitors cannot eat unless
they burn." Other aspects of the Inquisition were similarly question-
able by today's legal standards. Denunciations, which were encour-
aged and indeed portrayed as a moral obligation, were not a matter
of public record. The accused were not confronted with the allega-
tions brought against them but expected to produce confessions on
their own accord. Torture, a common expedient in the judicial sys-
tem of the time, was applied during interrogation to elicit confes-
sions. The stated aim was to reconcile the sinner with the church.
Such reconciliations were always accompanied by a penance, which
ranged from the obligation to wear garments stigmatizing the sinner
to the loss of professional privileges, from confiscation of property to
imprisonment and exile. Capital punishment was rare, however,
given the large number of cases prosecuted.

The royal policy of enforcing religious conformity put an end to
centuries of mutually profitable convivencia, the largely peaceful
coexistence of Jews, Muslims, and Christians. Tensions between the
groups had issued in pogroms before, but not on a national scale or
as a national policy which produced, in 1492, an edict expelling all
Jews from Spain. The short period allowed them to dispose of their
goods and settle their finances added economic hardship to the injury
and distress of the forced emigrants. Religious intolerance was the
norm, however; freedom of conscience was relegated to the realm of

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 7

"Utopia", the fictitious state created by Thomas More. Spanish
Muslims suffered a fate similar to that of the Jews. The generous
terms granted them on the conquest of Granada were soon revoked
and their conversion enforced. In 1502 they were given a choice in
Castile between conversion or emigration, with the proviso that in
the latter case male children under fifteen and girls under thirteen
had to be left behind. Aragon followed suit. Modern historians differ
in their interpretations of the motives behind the persecution and
expulsion of religious minorities in Spain, Although the effects of
their policies are universally deplored, it remains a matter of specula-
tion whether the monarchs adopted these policies primarily because
of religious concerns, or for the sake of financial profit, or from a
desire to centralize the state and establish an absolute rule.

Dynastic Speculation

The marriage politics of the Catholic Monarchs and the resulting
territorial gains have already been mentioned. Although the union of
the Spanish Crown with the Habsburgs greatly increased the power
and prestige of Spain and her rulers, the efforts of Ferdinand and
Isabel at shoring up power through political marriages were not
always accompanied by success. Juan, the only son of the couple,
married Margaret of Burgundy, the daughter of Emperor Maximilian,
but the prince died in 1497 and his wife was delivered of a stillborn
child. Isabel, the oldest daughter of the Catholic Monarchs, was
married to Manuel of Portugal, but died in childbirth in 1500. The
child, a son, died in infancy. Manuel's subsequent marriage to Maria,
Isabel's sister, produced a number of offspring, whose marriages with
their Spanish cousins eventually (but only temporarily) united the
two crowns. Another daughter of the Catholic Monarchs, Catherine,
married Henry VIII of England, but the marriage failed to produce
the hoped-for male heir and resulted in one of the most notorious
divorce cases in European history. The youngest daughter Juana,
whose mental instability earned her the byname "The Mad", married
Philip, the son of Emperor Maximilian. After Queen Isabel's death
in 1504, the succession passed to this last surviving child and her
husband. Philip's untimely death in 1506, however, and the absence
of Ferdinand from Spain, necessitated a period of regency by Cis-
neros. Recalled from Naples, Ferdinand assumed power until his
grandson Charles, born in 1500 and raised in the Netherlands, would

8 Spain in the Time of Cisneros

come of age. Ferdinand's own death in 1516 occasioned another brief
regency by Cisneros, until the arrival in Spain of the precocious
Charles, whose destiny it was to preside over European politics for
the next forty years.

Foreign Affairs

The foreign policy of the Catholic Monarchs, characterized by
the historian Jean-H. Mariejol as "quite unscrupulous but ever a-
droit" (Mariejol, Spain, 335), was largely shaped by Ferdinand.
Relations with neighbouring Portugal were friendly and the alliance
was strengthened through the bonds of marriage. Relations with
France were more volatile. Two Catalan counties, which had been
seized by the French, were recovered through diplomatic means in
1493, when the King, Charles VIII, wished to secure the home front
before invading Italy. However, the unexpectedly smooth progress of
Charles' expedition and his arrival in 1495 in Naples, an Aragonese
possession, renewed the conflict between the two crowns. The fate of
the kingdom took many twists and turns, but in the end the French
were ousted and the Spanish claim to Naples recognized. Ferdinand
was confirmed in its possession by Pope Julius II in 1510.

The conquest of Moorish Granada rounded off Castilian posses-
sions on the Iberian peninsula. Fear that African Muslims might en-
courage a rebellion and provide military aid prompted an extension
of the crusading effort into North Africa. This initiative was strongly
promoted and actively supported by Cisneros and resulted in the
conquest of Oran. Ferdinand was reluctant to commit troops and
money to follow up on the initial successes. His policy of limited
occupation was a realistic response to financial and political exigen-
cies, but meant the loss of an opportunity. Failure to secure the
North African coast deprived Spain of valuable strategic support in
the struggle for control over the Mediterranean during the second
half of the sixteenth century.

Patronage and the Arts

The cultural life of Spain flourished under the patronage of the
Crown, nobility, and representatives of the church, among them
Cisneros. The Spanish taste ran to lavish and intricate decoration
inspired by Moorish art. A profusion of decorative elements charac-
terized the "Flamboyant Gothic" of Spanish cathedrals. Plateresque

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 9

or "Isabelline" relief — a common feature in the architecture of the
time — was named after the Queen who sponsored the chief architect
of the period, Juan Guas. The monastery of San Juan de los Reyes in
Toledo and the Infantado Palace in Guadalajara are two examples of
this sumptuous and decorative style. It was only toward the end of
the century that art and architecture became more Italianate and
began to show the features generally associated with the High Renais-
sance. Isabel herself continued to favour more traditional northern
art. Her preference is reflected in her collection of more than 200
paintings, including works of Van der Weyden, Memling, and Bosch.

Cisneros' foundation, the University of Alcala, was frugally de-
signed, but shone as a centre of learning. Under his auspices one of
the most significant scholarly projects of his time took shape: a
critical edition of the Bible, the Complutensian Polyglot, so called
after the Latin name of Alcala. As in the rest of Europe, however,
secular writings in the vernacular played an increasingly more impor-
tant role. Nebrija's Spanish grammar, published in 1492, and his
Spanish-Latin dictionary issued three years later, were milestones in
this development. Fernando de Roja's dramatic novel La Celestina
(1499) was the most popular work of fiction. The social criticism of
the satirical Corbacho (printed 1498) of Alfonso Martinez and the
romance of Amadis de Gaula composed by Garcia Rodrigez (1508)
prepared the ground for the more sophisticated literary landscape of
Villalon and Cervantes. Drama and historiography flourished. Native
historians like Hernando del Pulgar and Elio Antonio Nebrija and
Italian emigres like Marineo Siculo and Pietro Martire found support
at the royal court since their works helped to build national pride
and lent stature to the monarchy.

It is against this background of political, cultural, and economic
developments that Cisneros' life and career unfolded. Spain was
entering the age of the Renaissance, and Cisneros was a man for the
times. Standing on the threshold of a new era, he combined in his
person the old and the new. His promotion of monasticism in its
pristine form, his personal asceticism, and his inclination toward
mysticism reflected medieval ideals, but also savoured of the spirit of
the Reformation movement, now gathering strength. Allowing him-
self to be drawn from a life of seclusion and meditation as a monk to
an active life at the royal court, Cisneros became a Renaissance
prelate: a soldier, a statesman, a leader of the church, a patron of

10 Spain in the Time of Cisneros

learning. He excelled as an organizer and administrator. As a power
broker, he weathered many political storms. He had a collector's
curiosity, a humanist's interest in languages, a scholar's zest for dispu-
tation. He was, in a word, a Renaissance Man. Describing Cisneros
as one of the key figures marking the transition of Spain from the
Middle Ages to the Renaissance, Joseph Perez remarks that he lacked
none of the features of the "modern personality". "Anticipating
Luther, he understood the necessity of a true reformation of church
and religion. A contemporary of Erasmus, he promoted the humani-
ties with the aim of reforming university studies. A supporter of the
Catholic Monarchs, he continued their programme of building a
modern state" (Perez, Cisneros, 7). Cisneros' impressive career at
court began as confessor to the Queen and evolved as he was ap-
pointed successively Archbishop of Toledo and Primate of Spain,
Inquisitor General, and Cardinal. His career placed him at the centre
of military campaigns, political intrigues, and ecclesiastical conflicts.
He served as regent of Castile in times of crisis, following the death
of Philip I in 1506 and that of Ferdinand in 1516. His own death
coincided with the arrival in Spain of the young monarch, Charles I,
bringing to an end a long career of loyal service to the Crown and a
life of uncompromising zeal for the Christian faith.

Cisneros' Earliest Biographers

The earliest descriptions of the life and career of the Cardinal
have the character of eulogies rather than historical accounts. They
contain much anecdotal evidence of doubtful authenticity that cannot
be corroborated by external evidence. The Cardinal's first biographer
was his secretary and confidant, Juan de Vallejo, who left manuscript
notes, published by the modern editor under the title Memorial de la
vida de Fray Francisco Jimenez de Cisneros (Memoir of the life of Fr.
Francisco Jimenez de Cisneros). The humanist Juan Vergara, another
of Cisneros' secretaries, also collected documents relevant to the
Cardinal's career, but died in 1557 before he could arrange the
material into a coherent narrative. His papers passed to a close friend,
Alvar Gomez de Castro, a native of Toledo and alumnus of Alcala.
Gomez drew on both Vallejo's and Vergara's writings, incorporating
them into his effusive account of Cisneros' life in De rebus gestis a
Francisco Ximenio Cisnerio, Archiepiscopo Toletano (The deeds of
Franciscus Ximenius Cisnerius, archbishop of Toledo), published at

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 11

Alcala in 1569. He explained the genesis of the work in his prologue:

There [in Toledo] I had occasion to enjoy the frequent compa-
ny of Juan Vergara, who had been made secretary to Jimenez
on account of his knowledge and his personal worth. We often
talked of the prudence and magnanimity of Jimenez and of his
other virtues. In the end I kindled the enthusiasm of Vergara,
who was already an old man and plagued by grave illnesses, so
that he decided to write about the deeds of Jimenez. In the first
heat of passion he gave an excellent account of the origin and
childhood of this exemplary man. And although he wrote only
a few pages, we owe Vergara a great debt nevertheless, for he
diligently rescued from obscurity many little-known details that
set the pattern for Jimenez' private life. . . . But once the first
ardour cooled, Vergara wrote nothing more during the remain-
ing three years of his life as his health deteriorated. Not that he
lacked the will, but the mental vigour essential to the task of
writing evaporated as death drew near. Once this man, who was
worthy of a longer life, had died, the University of Alcala fi-
nally decided to take an interest in an enterprise that promised
such glory to the institution and its alumni, and entrusted to me
the laborious task of writing the biography. They realized that
my collaboration with Vergara made me as knowledgeable of
the business as one could be, although I am in no way compara-
ble to him. And so I received the memoirs and the other docu-
ments which Vergara had prepared for the purpose. (24-5)

The circumstances in which Gomez composed the biography explain
why we cannot expect from the author a critical analysis of Cisneros'
actions. Commissioned by the university to commemorate its found-
er and relying on the memoirs of men who were devotees of the
Cardinal, Gomez was bound to give a heroic tint to his narrative and
present matters in the best possible light.

Upbringing and Education

We have no documentary evidence for the Cardinal's date of
birth, but according to his biographers, Gonzalo Jimenez de Cis-
neros was born in 1436 at Torrelaguna, a small town some fifty
kilometers northeast of Madrid. He was the oldest son of Alfonso
Cisneros, a receiver of tithes, and Maria de Astudillo de la Torre.

12 Spain in the Time of Cisneros

Both were descendants of well-established families. As a boy Gonzalo
received instruction from an uncle, his father's brother Alvaro, a
cleric who held a benefice in the vicinity of Torrelaguna. It is not
clear whether he continued his education at Salamanca, where he
eventually attended university, or at the estudio general attached to
the Franciscan monastery in Alcala.

He appears to have been a high-spirited young man, ending up
behind bars on one occasion for playing his guitar late at night and
disturbing the peace of his neighbours. We have little information
about his academic pursuits. His biographers are vague about the
courses he took and the year in which he graduated. Vallejo, in his
usual hagiographic style, reports that Cisneros' parents observed the
young man's talents, "his great nobility and dignity and the zealous
interest he took in his studies and his commitment to excellence and
service to God our Lord, and saw to it that he was sent to the Uni-
versity of Salamanca where ... he became a great scholar and took
the degree of bachelor of law" (Vallejo, Memorial, 2). According to
Gomez {De rebus gestis, 32), Cisneros also attended lectures in theol-
ogy given by "Maestro Roa" who is documented at the university
from 1463 to 1480. If this information is correct, it supplies us with
a rough time frame for his studies. Cisneros does not appear to have
held a bursary. If he was supported entirely by his family, he no
doubt experienced hardships. Hunger, cold, and quartan fever were
the constant companions of poor students. They were in the habit of
stamping their feet in class, "for two reasons," as a contemporary
explained: "to interrupt the professor [whose lectures ran overtime]
and to keep their feet warm" (Retana, Cisneros, 1:44).

Uceda

After his graduation, Cisneros pursued a career in the church. To
further his chances for promotion he travelled to Rome. His journey
there and his stay in the city have been much embroidered by his
biographers. We are told that Cisneros had the misfortune of falling
prey to robbers twice. Left destitute, he was rescued by a former
schoolmate whose generous help enabled him to reach his desti-
nation. Cisneros' biographers further tell us that his stay in Rome
was interrupted by the death of his father and that he returned to the
city a second time. Both claims are doubtful, however, and present
chronological difficulties.

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 13

Rome was a propitious place for Spaniards in the fifteenth centu-
ry. Pope Calixtus III (1455-8), a native of Valencia, had brought a
Spanish retinue to Rome and raised his nephews Alexander and
Rodrigo Borgia (later Pope Alexander VI) to positions of power. His
nepotism — excessive even by the standards of the time — made him
enemies. After his death in 1458, hostilities broke out against the
pope's "Catalan" proteges, but they were not easily dislodged, and
Cisneros likely benefited from the residual influence of his compatri-
ots. Calixtus' successor, Pius II (1458-64), pursued a policy of friend-
ship with Spain as a matter of self-interest, supporting Ferrante, the
natural son of Alfonso V of Aragon, against the claims to the Nea-
politan throne of the French.

Cisneros travelled to Rome some time before 1471 under Pius'
successor Paul II (1464-71) and returned with an expectativa, a papal
brief giving him title to the next vacant benefice in the diocese of
Toledo. The selling of expectativae as a means of filling the papal
coffers was a common, if illegitimate, practice. Condemned as cor-
rupt and simoniacal, the practice was expressly forbidden by the
Third Lateran Council in the twelfth century. It was too well estab-
lished, however, to be suppressed at once and was eliminated only in
the sixteenth century by the Council of Trent. The buyer of an
expectativa, much like a modern investor in futures, ran a certain risk
and had to be patient. When the hoped-for benefice fell vacant, he
often had to defend his right against other contenders. His main dif-
ficulty was to secure endorsement by the local bishop, who was
usually inclined to promote the interests of his own candidate. This
was also Cisneros' experience.

When a benefice became vacant in Uceda, to which Cisneros'
native town was attached, he put forward his claim. A legal wrangle
ensued with Alfonso Carrillo, the archbishop of Toledo, whose privi-
lege it was to make the appointment and who had reserved the bene-
fice for one of his retainers. According to Cisneros' early biogra-
phers, who may have dramatized the account, he was imprisoned for
a time, but swore that "having just title to the office he was not
going to forfeit it; and he would die rather than obey His Lordship
[the archbishop]" (Gomez, De rebus gestis, quoted Retana, Cisneros,
1:63). In the end he succeeded in his quest and became archpriest of
Uceda. Here, finally, we are on solid historical ground.

A papal document, dated 3 December 1471, confirms Cisneros'

14 Spain in the Time of Cisneros

appointment (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 1:30). The brief sheds additional
Hght on the affair. We learn that the benefice at Uceda was not va-
cated by death; rather the incumbent was removed because he had
released a member of the clergy to the secular court. The circum-
stances surrounding the case are rather curious. The papal document
reveals that a certain Pedro Encina, a member of the clergy who
"lived in marriage with a young woman, was accused of theft. To
escape the death penalty ... he sought asylum in St. Magdalene at
Torrelaguna, which was in the jurisdiction of the archpriest [of
Uceda, Pedro Garcia de Guaza]." The archpriest, however, disre-
garded the clerical privilege of the refugee and handed him over to a
secular judge, who condemned him to death and had him decapitat-
ed. The irregular conduct of the archpriest was reported to the Holy
See by none other than Cisneros, who had of course a personal inter-
est in seeing the priest prosecuted and relieved of his office. The
papal document states: "The said Pedro Garcia has shown himself
unworthy of the office of archpriest which he held. . . . Wishing to
bestow a special favour on the aforementioned Gonzalo [Cisneros],
in view of his aforesaid gifts and merits ... we relieve Pedro Garcia
of his benefice by way of judgment and confer it on Cisneros" (Re-
tana, Cisneros, 1:61-2). The dubious role Cisneros played in the affair
may well explain why his first biographers chose to omit the details
of Garcia's dismissal from their account and instead stressed Cisne-
ros' heroic resistance to the archbishop.

It is uncertain whether Cisneros was ordained before his journey
to Rome or during his stay there. Nor do we know whether he felt
a genuine vocation for the church at this stage in his life or, like
many of his contemporaries, merely chose a career that would pro-
vide him with a respectable living. His later actions at any rate reveal
him as a man committed to the Church and, in the eyes of some, a
religious zealot.

Sigiienza

Cisneros is documented as archpriest in the records of Uceda until
1476, when he exchanged his benefice for a first chaplaincy in Si-
giienza in the diocese of Pedro Gonzalez de Mendoza. It was a pru-
dent move, coinciding with the decline of Carrillo's fortunes and po-
litical ascent of Mendoza, from whose power at court Cisneros was
to benefit in later years. Cisneros' name appears repeatedly in the

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 15

administrative records of Sigiienza. In 1477 and 1481, for example, he
acted in lawsuits for the chapter. His organizational talents impressed
the archbishop, who made him his vicar-general, that is, administra-
tor of Sigiienza — an office that brought with it a number of privi-
leges and benefices. In 1484, however, Cisneros abruptly relinquished
his duties as vicar-general and entered the Franciscan order. It was at
this time that he changed his first name to "Francisco", a common
gesture that identified the bearer with the ideals of St. Francis, the
founder of the order. We know little about Cisneros' motives for
leaving his position at Sigiienza or his spiritual state at that time. His
biographer, Juan de Vallejo, piously declares: "Inspired by the Holy
Spirit, he freely left his office to a man of dignity, learning, and
integrity and his benefices to other well-deserving persons, whom he
thought likely to discharge their duties conscientiously, and left the
world" (Vallejo, Memorial, 4).

Cisneros' movements over the next years are uncertain. He may
have stayed at the convent of San Juan de los Reyes, recently found-
ed by Queen Isabel. He may have spent some time at the hermitage
of El Castanar and from there moved to Salceda, another rustic
retreat, the spiritual heritage of Pedro de Villaneces. His administra-
tive talents at any rate were not overlooked in the new surroundings,
and he soon rose to become guardian of the house at Salceda.

Confessor of Queen Isabel

1492, the annus mirabilis of Spanish history, in which the "In-
dies" were discovered and Granada conquered, was also a significant
year in Cisneros' life. On the recommendation of Gonzalez de Men-
doza he was chosen confessor of Queen Isabel. It seems that he had
to be coaxed from his retreat. The conditions under which he reluc-
tantly accepted the honour included the request that one or two
companions from Salceda accompany him, that he be permitted to go
on retreats from time to time, stay at a Franciscan hermitage of his
choice, and administer the sacraments without having to obtain spe-
cial permission from local church authorities (Garcia Oro, Cisneros,
1:45). In his new position Cisneros wielded considerable power. His
tasks involved not only guiding the conscience of the pious queen
but also counselling her in her political decisions. However, Vallejo's
assertion that Cisneros "initiated" the expulsion of the Jews is
implausible. The royal decree of March 1492 which expelled all Jews

16 Spain in the Time of Cisneros

from the realm was obviously the culmination of an antisemitic poli-
cy that had issued in pogroms before. Cisneros' influence over the
Queen was, initially at least, primarily of a spiritual nature. Pietro
Martire, one of the royal historians, describes her as becoming
increasingly "closed off in sadness" (quoted Liss, Isabel, 312). The
circumstances in her own life — her age, deaths in the family, and a
sense of loss of control — predisposed her perhaps to embrace the
contemplative life that was Cisneros' own ideal. The royal historian
Marineo Siculo reported that she led the life of a nun, exerting
herself in prayer and spiritual readings. No doubt she found comfort
and inspiration in a confessor who shared her outlook.

Cisneros was fifty-six years old at the time of his appointment, a
slim, tall man of upright bearing, with well-proportioned limbs. The
eyes in his large angular face were deep-set and lively, his nose
aquiline, his voice deep and resonant. By all accounts he had an air of
great dignity. Pietro Martire, a shrewd observer of the court scene,
describes the first impression Cisneros made and the reputation that
preceded him:

They say he is called Francisco Ximenez and lives under the
rule and habit of Saint Francis. They report that he was at some
time a dignitary of the Cathedral of Siguenza, enjoying honour,
fat rents, and great prestige among the clergy. Putting aside all
human concerns and fearing the treacherous tides of the world
and the snares of the devil, he abandoned it all so as not to
become enmeshed in the pernicious desires and temptations of
the secular world. Thus he passed from great liberty to a life of
much constraint and to strictest solitude, not because he had
scant means (like many people), or for lack of spirit and confi-
dence in himself (like the majority), nor to grow plump in indo-
lence (like others), nor for fear of being condemned for crimes
(like certain people). They say he is industrious, full of good-
ness, and a man of singular learning. According to reports, he
equals Saint Augustine in wisdom. Saint Jerome in austerity of
life, Saint Ambrose in zeal for those less fortunate than himself.
He avoids human contact and prefers the solitude of the forests.
He walks barefoot through the silent woods, dressed in sack-
cloth, content with little, sleeping on straw. In private he pun-
ishes his flesh with vigils and castigations ... A number of friars
of his order have given testimony that on many occasions they

Spain in the Time of Cisneros 17

have seen him in a state of ecstasy, just as one reads in Saint
Paul. These and other things are said of the man. It will be a
pity if, in the usual course, the courtiers will succeed in chang-
ing his character and if some day he will become puffed up with
privilege and carried away by ambition, (Ep. 107, 19 May 1492)

When Archbishop Mendoza died in 1495 and Cisneros was designat-
ed as his successor, he was still considered an enigma by Martire:
"People say he is exceptional, not in learning, but in holiness. I have
not yet formed an impression of his true nature. So far he has not
had much contact with the court, which generally corrupts the inner
man" (Ep. 160, 11 June 1495). A few months later Martire had had
a taste of Cisneros' influence and determination, "This is the man,"
he wrote, "by whose counsel Spain is now governed. Because of his
lively intellect, his gravity and wisdom, and his holiness which sur-
passes all cenobites, hermits, and anchorites, he has such authority
with my monarchs as no one has had before" (Ep. 163, 5 August 1495).
Marineo Siculo was similarly unprepared for Cisneros' rise to
power. His Eulogy of Spain, presented to the monarchs in the four-
teen-nineties, contained biographical notes on leading churchmen.
Cisneros was not among them. Realizing his faux pas, he later wrote
a fawning letter to Cisneros, promising to include him in a revised
edition: "I have in mind, wisest of prelates, to add some things to my
book in praise of Spain, which I omitted when I wrote about the
affairs in Spain in summary form. I omitted them, not out of negli-
gence or forgetfulness, but because the number of illustrious men and
deeds in Spain was so infinite that I could not include them all." He
shores up this limp excuse with further explanations. He had com-
posed his Eulogy shortly after his arrival from Sicily, when he was
unfamiliar with the subject matter and pressed for time because of
teaching duties at the University of Salamanca. Now that he was
attached to the royal court he had made the acquaintance of many
more praiseworthy individuals, "And as I was contemplating whom
to commemorate first, Your Excellence came to mind before anyone
else, rightly to be preferred to them all. The sanctity of your life, the
excellence of your character, your singular learning, your fervent
love and worship of God, and your other innumerable virtues
seemed to me worthy of being celebrated in Latin so that they might
become better known in future to everyone" (Marineo Siculo, Episto-
larum lihri, 1.17),

Cisneros' Programme of
Church Reform

Xlnjoying the favour of the court, Cisneros advanced rapidly. He
became Provincial of the Franciscans in Castile in 1494 and was
elevated to the archbishopric of Toledo on the death of Gonzales de
Mendoza in 1495. It was in these years that he began to take on an
active role as reformer. Three tasks occupied his attention: the re-
form of the religious orders, especially that of the Franciscans; the
reform of the archdiocese of Toledo; and an ambitious educational
programme that culminated in the foundation of the University of
Alcala (see chapter 4).

In the nineteenth century German historians championed what is
now called the "Spanish Thesis". Protagonists of the thesis noted
that the Catholic reform movement was not merely a "Counter-
Reformation", that is, a reaction to the rise of Protestantism. The
drive to purify the church and to promote spiritual fervour preceded
Luther's rise to prominence and had its roots in the fifteenth centu-
ry. This reforming spirit was more particularly associated with Spain
and the efforts of Cisneros. More recently, however, historians have
pointed out that Italy and the Low Countries — the heartland of the
Devotio Modema — played an equally significant role in the early
stages of religious reform. More importantly, scholars today empha-
size the complexity of religious currents in early modern Europe.
The ideas propagated, the practices observed, the motivation driving
them, and their philosophical underpinnings are too diverse to be
associated with one region or one man's initiatives. The prominent
role Cisneros played as a protagonist of church reform remains un-
contested, however.

The Reform of the Religious Orders:
Conventuals versus Observants

One of Cisneros' first documented acts as provincial was the con-

Cisneros' Programme of church Reform 19

vocation of a chapter synod in Aguilera in 1494. According to the
records, Cisneros ordered that "the old constitutions and regulations
established by the founders should be observed to the letter" and that
those contravening them be severely punished {AIA 10 [1950]: 223).

The Franciscan Order was at the time in the grip of a bitter con-
flict between Conventual and Observant houses. The latter preserved
the rules of their founder; the former had diverged considerably from
the austere regulations of St. Francis and had become feudal lords
with vassals and a substantial income from rents. The friars lived a
secular life, displayed the trappings of wealth, indulged in worldly
pleasures, and were at liberty to inherit money and spend it as they
pleased. What had originally been a movement to reform the whole
order led to a division which was acknowledged by the Council of
Constance in 1415. Over the next century efforts to reach a compro-
mise failed. A final attempt at reunion at a general chapter meeting
in Rome in 1506 was unsuccessful. In 1517, Pope Leo X formally
separated the two groups. Paradoxically, his bull "Ite vos" is referred
to as the "unity bull", because it was hoped at the time that the
Conventuals would join the Observants, but it merely united the re-
formed splinter groups and removed the Conventuals into a separate
order (Moorman, Franciscan Order, 585; Telechea, La reforma, 51-3).

In Spain the Observants enjoyed the approbation of Cisneros and
the court. A considerable number of Conventual houses turned Ob-
servant, some voluntarily, others under pressure. Such tactics were
not always successful, however. In a well-documented Catalan case
Ferdinand tried to pressure the Conventual monastery at Calatayud
into converting to Observantism. An exchange of letters in 1495
between Ferdinand and the guardian of the house, Juan Vergara,
shows the latter's reluctance to accede to Ferdinand's request. A
move by the King to go over his head and cite the provincial of
Aragon, Pedro Castrobol, before the court, was similarly unsuccess-
ful. The provincial refused to cooperate, and Ferdinand was forced to
abandon the project for the time being.

In Castile Cisneros' attempts at reform were similarly met with
resistance from those whose living standard was affected. He also en-
countered resistance from laymen, local grandees who had endowed
chapels and feared that the necessary rites would not be performed
by a reformed order. There was also opposition from Francesco
Nanni, the Minister General of the Order in Rome, who agreed with

20 Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform

the complainants that some of Cisneros' procedures were illegal.
According to his biographer Gomez de Castro, he had been using
every means at his disposal: "It was his goal to place the Conventual
houses under the jurisdiction of the Observants by praying or paying
or any other clever ruse" {De rebus gestis, 44).

In 1500 Francesco Nanni died and was succeeded by Giles Delfini,
a man determined to reform the Conventuals but to keep the order
united. His moderate stand pleased neither party. The Observants, in
particular, feared for their independence. Trying to make his policy
palatable, he visited Spain twice. In Castile he found Cisneros recalci-
trant. In 1503 he protested the archbishop's attitude to Rome and
asked that he be forced to cooperate. A planned general chapter
meeting which was to resolve the issue was delayed when Pope Alex-
ander died. The chapter finally convened under Julius II in 1506, but
Delfini was too ill to plead his case. He died shortly afterwards. A
papal bull forbidding the taking over of Conventual houses by Ob-
servants remained ineffectual and was ignored by Cisneros in Spain.

By the end of the fifteenth century, the Observants were in the
ascendancy throughout Europe. Historians have credited Cisneros
with the success of the reform movement in Spain. His determined
resistance to Delfini and his unwavering pursuit of a more austere
monastic ideal in the face of considerable resistance from the Spanish
Conventuals earned him a conspicuous place in history among
Catholic reformers.

The Poor Clares

Founded by St. Francis' disciple St. Clare, the Poor Clares (or
Clarisses) were bound closely to the friars by their rule and formally
associated with the Franciscan Order by Pope Gregory IX in 1227.
They were founded as a mendicant order, but like the Franciscans
had gradually abandoned the ideal of poverty. In the fifteenth centu-
ry many convents offered a comfortable life. They attracted young
noblewomen and wealthy widows, who had their own private
fortune, and continued to live in the style to which they were accus-
tomed. Few of them had the sense of vocation or spiritual commit-
ment envisaged by St. Clare. In Spain the Catholic monarchs includ-
ed the Poor Clares in their reform programme. They wrote to the
Franciscan provincial of Aragon in 1497: "One of the principal issues
and concerns in the reform of the convents of Santa Clara is the

Cisneros' Programme of church Reform 21

assignment of confessors. They should be old and godfearing and
chosen only by the men who carry out visitations" (ACA Reg. 3611,
fol. 143r; Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 2:209). Visitations in subsequent
years aimed to correct the most common abuses. They curtailed the
nuns' contacts with the outside world, enforced the rules governing
dress and food, and generally fostered spiritual renewal. In 1494 the
monarchs put Cisneros in charge of the reforms in Castile. Cisneros
pursued the matter with his customary zeal. In 1497 the convents
were placed under the supervision of the Observants. Those affected
by the reform turned to the papal court, but found little support.

Cisneros' examiners wrangled not only with recalcitrant convents
but also with local authorities who resented their interference. Ber-
nardino de Guaza, a canon of Toledo, complained in a report to the
papal court of the indignities he suffered at the hands of Cisneros'
examiners. They had "put their sickle into another man's corn . . .
had him taken prisoner and thrown into jail and did not scruple to
detain him there. Some of these sons of iniquity, trusting in the pro-
tection of the Archbishop [Cisneros], seized the convents belonging
to the Poor Clares by force, detained the nuns and are still detaining
them" (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, I'.m). At the general chapter meeting
which took place in Rome in 1506 under the auspices of Julius II, the
pope formally placed the Poor Clares under Observant control.
Disputes continued in some areas. In 1512 one of Cisneros' deputees
complained of the dogged resistance of the nuns at Palencia and
proposed to have the rebels transferred, but on the whole the reform
proceeded as planned.

Reforms in Toledo

The year 1495 brought Cisneros' elevation to the archbishopric of
Toledo and the primacy of Spain, a position of great power and
prestige. His appointment caused surprise, because this honour was
normally bestowed on men of wealth and lineage. Cisneros had
neither. The choice of the monarchs was no doubt motivated by
political and economic considerations as much as by considerations
for Cisneros' personal worth. Time was of the essence. A drawn-out
interregnum was undesirable since it afforded local authorities an
opportunity to flex their muscle and make appointments at will. Cis-
neros was seen by Ferdinand and Isabel as a loyal servant and a com-
petent manager of their interests. Contemporary historians imply

22 Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform

that financial negotiations took place. Zurita alleges that an agree-
ment was reached that part of the episcopal income would finance
royal projects. Juan Vallejo speaks of an understanding that Cisneros'
personal expenses would be looked after, but that "the remainder of
his income would subsidize the monarchs." They would furthermore
retain control over the fortified places in his diocese (Vallejo, Memori-
al, 13). Whatever the details of the agreement, it is clear that the
appointment was calculated to strengthen the Crown's position and
to benefit the monarchs financially. Indeed one of the first acts of the
new archbishop was the negotiation of a tithe to be collected by the
Crown, a privilege granted them by the Pope in May of 1495.

The archbishop's control over appointments and funds did not go
unchallenged. During the interregnum, the cathedral chapter made a
concerted effort to safeguard its autonomy. They were met by
equally determined efforts on the part of the monarchs to protect the
episcopal authority which during a vacancy devolved on them. The
chapter yielded in the face of threats and pressure, but their initial
relationship with Cisneros was predictably difficult. It began with a
memorandum from the archbishop expressing concern over the
problem of concubinage. This was followed up with visitations, given
force by a papal directive "to lead the diocese back on the straight
path and recall them to the religious observance and moral rectitude
to which they are in duty bound" (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 1:72). By
March 1496, there were rumours of a planned insurrection, involving
not only Toledo but other chapters as well. The reports alarmed the
monarchs who instructed the corregidor of Toledo, Pedro de Castilla,
to investigate the matter. He discovered that the capelldn mayor
Alfonso de Albornoz had been sent to Rome at the head of a delega-
tion to complain — as one of the witnesses said — that the chapter
"did not get along well with that archbishop, that he made them eat
in the refectory and that they had to take all their orders from the
said archbishop. He himself [the witness] had heard them boast . . .
that the chapter of Toledo had on other occasions removed one
archbishop and appointed another and that this was easily accom-
plished" (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 1:75-6). Albornoz' initiative was cut
short when the Spanish ambassador to the papal court detained the
delegation in April 1496. Albornoz, according to Cisneros' biogra-
pher Gomez de Castro, spent some time in confinement. It appears,
however, that the Pope was not amenable to the Spanish ambassa-

Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform 23

dor's request that Albornoz be removed from his post. He remained
capelldn mayor. Cisneros himself acquiesced, considering it politic to
appease the chapter.

The question has been raised by historians whether Cisneros'
reforms had the formal endorsement of the Holy See. Documentary
evidence confirms that he acted with authorization. The monarchs
had sought and obtained permission to initiate reforms. In March
1493 a brief from Alexander VI ("Exposuerunt nobis") authorized
them to "appoint suitable prelates and men of holiness, conscience,
and integrity," to examine, correct, and reform "some monasteries
and nunneries . . . whose life falls short of the requirements of the
rules of their institution." They entrusted the task to Cisneros. In
December 1494 the pope confirmed Cisneros' authority to reform
the Poor Clares; and on December 1496, in the brief "Ut ea"
(Garcia Oro, Reforma, 376), he commissioned Cisneros and Diego
Deza to reform the houses of the Franciscan and Dominican Orders
respectively. Subsequent briefs refer to the two men as "papal com-
missaries for the reform" (in the brief "Ut imponatur finis" issued
by Alexander VI, November 1497) and to Cisneros as "the reformer
of all monasteries and houses" (in the brief "Alias ex vobis", 1501).
Pope Julius II confirmed Cisneros' powers to reform the monasteries
and orders and renewed the mission in a brief of 1503 (Retana, Cis-
neros, 1:129). It is certain therefore that Cisneros was acting on prop-
er authority in initiating the reforms. However, his uncompromising
attitude led a group of Conventual Franciscans to take their case to
the pope and resulted in a temporary suspension of his powers. Ob-
liging the lobbyists, Alexander wrote in 1496: "To put an end to the
complaints which are brought before us continually, especially by the
Minors of St. Francis, on account of the reform which we had under-
taken in your realms and dominions ... it has been decreed that the
reform process be stopped and the business be totally suspended until
the whole truth has been found and we decide on a suitable course of
action" (quoted Retana, Cisneros, 1:143).

Duties at court prevented Cisneros for two years after his ap-
pointment as archbishop from visiting his diocese in person. When
he formally entered Toledo in 1497, his austere apparel stood in stark
contrast to the sumptuous dress of the dignitaries receiving him.
While they displayed their wealth, he was riding a mule, as usual,
and wore sandals with straps "through which one could see his bare

24 Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform

toes" (Vallejo, Memorial, 16-17). His excessive modesty was reported
to the Pope, who wrote to admonish him to adopt a manner more in
keeping with the dignity of God and the Church. The hierarchy in
the Church, he wrote, was marked by certain external honours. "As
you well know, one may sin by default just as one may sin by excess.
Observing the hierarchy and order of the Church was pleasing to
God. Therefore everyone, but especially the prelates, ought to be
concerned, not only about their spiritual lives and character, but also
about their deportment, so that they be faulted neither for proud and
pompous display nor for excessive and superstitious modesty." As
archbishop, the Pope continued, Cisneros "ought to observe the cus-
tomary standard of dress and retinue, to cultivate an external image
appropriate to [his] rank . . . and the dignity of [his] office" (Retana,
Cisneros, 1:179). Cisneros complied with the wishes of the pope and
adopted an appearance appropriate to his station, but could not be
persuaded to wear shoes or boots, keeping the Franciscan rule of
wearing sandals.

Just as he had admonished the members of his order to return to
the practices of their founder, he spoke to the canons of Toledo of
the need for spiritual renewal. The speech, quoted by Gomez, al-
though perhaps not Cisneros' exact words, reflects his general atti-
tude. "You are aware, beloved brethren, that I was elevated to this
position against my will," he said. "And no one knows better than
I how unworthy I am of this honour, for I have already begun to
groan under the burden and to doubt my abilities, although I trust in
the goodness of the Lord and in the help you are bound to provide,
giving me your support and prayers. Certainly you must help me to
improve the divine service in this diocese, to reform customs, and to
restore a vigorous discipline. For this purpose I wish to see in you,
first of all, manifestations of splendid ecclesiastical virtue, so that you
may take first place in virtue as you now take first place in honour
and wealth in this diocese" {De rebus gestis, 672).

A good picture of Cisneros' reform programme for the secular
clergy and the concern he showed for his diocese and their pastoral
care emerges from the proceedings of the synods of Toledo and
Talavera he called in 1497 and 1498. He asked priests to encourage
their congregation to go to confession and take communion and ad-
monished the clergy to provide spiritual leadership. Concerned about
the parishioners' knowledge of the articles of faith, he instructed

Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform 25

priests to provide doctrinal lessons for children every Sunday. In the
published Constituciones del arzobispado de Toledo (Salamanca, 1498)
he castigated parish priests for neglecting this part of their duty "so
that parishioners do not know what is essential to their salvation and
what constitutes the foundation of our faith, such as making the sign
of the cross, saying the Our Father and Hail Mary, the Creed, the
Salve Regina, and the Ten Commandments of the Church" (Garcia
Oro, Reforma, 337). He therefore published in the appendix of the
Constitutiones a brief catechism to be used in the instruction of the
congregation. He also admonished the parish priests to explain the
gospel readings to their congregation and attached a penalty of two
reales for non-compliance with this mandate. To ensure that priests
were available to their parishioners, residence was enforced and
failure to keep residence made subject to penalty. Cisneros also con-
cerned himself with external expressions of respect for the Church.
He emphasized that parishioners ought to be taught to cross them-
selves on entering the church and to turn with deference toward the
place where the Eucharist was kept. The Eucharist itself and the
vessel in which it was kept were to be maintained fresh and clean.
Cisneros furthermore abolished the practice of charging for such
services as extreme unction, to ensure that poverty did not deprive
parishioners of the spiritual comfort of sacraments. Two regulations
enforced by Cisneros were of administrative importance and at the
same time functioned as checks on the compliance of the parish with
Catholic practices: parish priests were instructed to keep a scrupulous
record of baptisms and to take an annual census of parishioners who
had fulfilled their Easter duty, that is, gone to confession and taken
the Eucharist. The decrees of the synods manifest Cisneros' concern
for the spiritual welfare of the congregation and support Wadding's
assessment (Wadding, Annales Minorum, 1497, #8) that "he trans-
formed the diocese to such an extent that the people seemed to have
been reborn in grace."

The episcopal records document not only Cisneros' pastoral care
but also his work as administrator. Here the shrewd steward of
resources and protector of rights and privileges is in evidence. The
case of Bernardino de Mendoza serves as an illustration of this facet.
Cisneros, who had nominated Pietro Martire to the vacant arch-
deanery of Guadalajara, found his nomination challenged by Bernar-
dino de Mendoza on the strength of a papal expectativa. One is, of

26 Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform

course, Immediately reminded of the contest involving Cisneros' own
claim to the archpriesthood of Uceda. The similarity between the
two cases was immediately pointed out, but the archbishop denied
that the same rules applied in his and Bernardino's case. He insisted
that the latter's claim had expired because the pope who had granted
the expectativa was no longer alive. He furthermore reminded his
challenger that "he had a heart of adamant and an arm of steel"
(Retana, Cisneros, 1:271). Bernardino apparently abandoned his claim.

The archbishopric of Toledo made Cisneros a wealthy seigneur.
It was one of the richest sees. While the average income of bishops
was between eight and twenty thousand ducats, Toledo yielded
eighty thousand ducats. The administrative records inform us that
Cisneros spent about a quarter of his enormous income on house-
hold expenses, another quarter on building projects and military
ventures, and half on alms. The latter went to support religious
houses who in turn were expected to distribute the alms among the
local poor, but sums were also allocated to specific purposes such as
the support of poor students, the provision of dowries for the daugh-
ters of the poor, the support of widows and children who had been
abandoned. Cisneros' record is relatively free of the crass nepotism
prevalent in his time. His proteges were, on the whole, worthy men.
The exception is the favour he showed to his brother Bernardino, for
which he was ill compensated. Bernardino, likewise a Franciscan,
joined the malcontents protesting Cisneros' reforms. His part in the
plotting led to his imprisonment, but he soon obtained pardon from
his brother. On one occasion a disagreement led to a violent encoun-
ter in which Bernardino throttled his brother and left him for dead.
He was apprehended but through his brother's leniency escaped the
death penalty customary for a crime of this magnitude. He did not
reform, however. Some years after the death of Cisneros, we read
that his successor transferred Bernardino to the Franciscan monastery
in Torrelaguna and placed him under guard "because he does not live
as he ought to" (quoted Retana, Cisneros, 1:199).

Cisneros continued to lead an exemplary life of work and prayer.
Gomez de Castro gives us an account of the archbishop's daily rou-
tine. He arose early, sometimes before dawn. From daybreak until
noon he was in his office receiving petitioners. They invariably
found him pacing up and down behind his desk, Bible in hand. Un-

Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform 27

less the visitor was a member of the nobility, the archbishop con-
ducted the interview in ambulatory fashion, terminating it as soon as
possible by returning his attention to the Bible. At noon Cisneros
gathered around him the household pages and personally inspected
the progress they had made in their studies, ascertaining at the same
time the competence of the instructors, to whom he had entrusted
their education.

His meals were eaten in public and attended by a number of
scholars invited to discuss subjects of interest. Among the partici-
pants in these learned conversations were the humanist Juan de
Vergara, the philologists Antonio Nebrija and Pablo Coronel, and
the theologians Pedro de Lerma and Nicolas de Paz. One of the
guests (quoted Retana, Cisneros, 1:188) described the experience:

In a twelve-months period I defended three or four theological
or philosophical conclusions per day. And because the disputa-
tions offered such an admirable display of learning, many schol-
ars attended them as well as [nobles]. . . . Doctors of theology
continually came forward on all sides to propose questions and
ascertain the truth . . . and the disputations never stopped except
when the troop of soldiers stationed in the place came with
their captain to present themselves before my Lord the Cardinal
(for he was an aficionado of arms as much as letters and virtue),
and when they had given their salute, the captain went up to
the table to kiss the hands of my Lord the Cardinal, and he
dismissed them graciously. Then we theologians returned to our
intellectual exercises.

After lunch Cisneros returned to his office and spent the after-
noon in consultation with royal councillors, conferring with them
about matters of government and administration.

When this business had been concluded, Cisneros retired to his
room and for his recreation and relief from work he frequently
studied passages in St. Thomas and other holy books. At six
o'clock sharp we doctors of theology and his household were
summoned to his study and there we spent two hours and
sometimes more until dinner in intellectual pursuits, proposing
questions of importance and giving our several opinions about
it and attempting resolutions; and in matters pertaining to Holy

28 Cisneros' Programme of Church Reform

Writ, he spoke with great authority, for he was very learned
and well versed in it. (ibidem)

Dinner was a frugal affair, often consisting of a sort of gruel made
of bread, milk, honey, and nuts. Cisneros then retired for the night,
ending his day examining his conscience and reading the breviary.

Crusader, Missionary , and
Guardian of the Faith

In 1507 Cisneros was made Inquisitor General of Castile and acted
as Inquisitor General of Aragon until 1513, when the Bishop of
Tortosa, Luis Mercader, assumed the office (Perez, Cisneros, 84). Cis-
neros' predecessor, Diego de Deza, had opposed the appointment.
His letter on the subject addressed to Ferdinand was full of dire
warnings: "Your Highness knows full well that this appointment
would be an offense against God and mean the destruction of the In-
quisition" (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 1:180). Others, by contrast, saw
Cisneros as the only man capable of restoring order to a corrupt
institution. Deza had resigned under a cloud. He cited old age and
poor health, but other reasons had entered on his decision. He had
made the political error of supporting Philip the Handsome against
Ferdinand (see below, chapter 5) and his office had been compro-
mised by the discreditable conduct of his lieutenants. The most
infamous of his officials was Diego Rodriguez Lucero, who had been
appointed Inquisitor of Cordoba in 1499. He instituted a reign of
terror, practising fraud and extortion. Pietro Martire reported that he
fabricated evidence and treated the accused with unwarranted cruelty.
Lucero (nicknamed "Tenebrero") had brought trumped-up charges
against young converso women. Although they had led, according to
the testimony of their neighbours, a closely guarded life in their par-
ents' home, they were accused of such unlikely activities as preaching
Judaism and engaging in bacchanalia. Martire expressed surprise that
anyone could have believed such "fairy tales or rather such infernal
tales" (Ep. 385). According to another contemporary chronicler,
Lucero's motive was greed and ambition. "To gain credit as a zealous
minister of faith and to gain higher dignities, he began to treat the
accused prisoners with extreme severity, forcing them to reveal the
names of their accomplices, which resulted in denunciations against
so great a number of people, both converses and Old Christians, that

30 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

the city [Cordoba] was scandalized and came close to rioting" (Kam-
en, Spain, 51). There was outrage when Lucero arrested Hernando de
Talavera, Archbishop of Granada, a saintly man, who had treated the
Moors in his diocese with leniency. Talavera was of Jewish extraction
and, on the strength of a denunciation obtained from a servant under
torture, was accused of judaizing and keeping a synagogue in his pal-
ace. The case was appealed to the pope, who acquitted Talavera of
the charges. After Cisneros' appointment as Inquisitor General, a
commission convoked at Burgos in June 1508 reviewed Lucero's ac-
tivities. He was arrested and relieved of his post. His innocent vic-
tims were released from prison, penalties revoked, and reputations
restored. But, as Pietro Martire commented, Lucero's conviction
could not compensate them for their suffering and disgrace. He
escaped punishment, moreover, through the intervention of powerful
friends, and was allowed to retire to Seville.

Cisneros as Inquisitor General

The letters and memoranda documenting Cisneros' tenure as
Inquisitor General show his concern for the integrity of the inquisi-
torial process. He inquired about the conditions of jails, dealt with
accusations that fiscals (prosecutors) were embezzling the property of
prisoners, and examined the nature of the evidence brought against
the accused. In one case he directed officials not to imprison men on
vague evidence, for example, "if they had no other suspicion or
indication to go by than partial circumcision . . . for there were no
definite rules in such cases, and it seems to me one must proceed
with discretion" (Meseguer, "Documentos," 58; the following quota-
tions come from the same source). Among the documents relating to
his tenure are numerous privileges granted to relatives of condemned
persons, restoring their right to practice their profession, which a
strict interpretation of the law had taken from them. Thus "Maestro
Juan, physician and surgeon . . . legally prohibited from holding
public office by reason of being the son of a man condemned for
heresy" was rehabilitated and "shall not be inconvenienced or have
his peace disturbed for this reason now or ever" (100). Similarly
Gonzalo Diaz of Seville was permitted to cure boils (but no other
disease), although his father and uncle had been condemned for het-
erodoxy (106, sim.78, 79). A group of young people aged between fif-
teen and twenty years were acquitted of practising Jewish ceremonies

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 31

because they had been under age (108). Others were shown clemency
in special circumstances. A woman's jail sentence was converted
because she was ill, "so that she may seek treatment and recover her
health and be able to do the exercises necessary for her cure" (120).
In another case, two Moriscos, who had been imprisoned by the In-
quisition, had their property returned to them "because its value was
insignificant and they are hard pressed" (156). Cisneros also con-
cerned himself with procedures. A letter to officials at Toledo ad-
monished them to attend the required meetings of the inquisitorial
board. Cisneros had been informed "that some do not fulfil their
duty and come to the meetings very late and are often absent, so that
cases are delayed" (119). In future those guilty of lateness or absentee-
ism were to be fined a third of their salary. By tightly controlling
new appointments, monitoring documentation, and diligently super-
vising the inquisitorial process Cisneros restored discipline and order
to the institution.

The question of reforming the Inquisition was raised officially by
the cortes of Monzon in 1510 and again in 1512. Agreements were
signed between the Inquisition and individual provinces that put
limits on the number of officials and their competency and eased
regulations governing the confiscation of goods and the trade restric-
tions placed on conversos. Complaints against the Inquisition contin-
ued, however. After Ferdinand's death in 1516, Cisneros alleged that
conversos lobbying the court of Charles, the young heir to the
throne, were using bribery in an effort to obtain their goal. He noted
that in Ferdinand's reign they had offered to subsidize a war against
Navarre, but the King had declined the bribe, "for he wished to
place devotion and observance of the Christian religion . . . above
whatever riches and gold there was in the world." He implored
Charles "to keep before his eyes this singular and recent example of
his grandfather and not allow that the court procedure of the Inquisi-
tion be changed" (Cart. Xim. 262). In particular, the practice of keep-
ing the names of witnesses secret was vigorously defended by Cisne-
ros. He argued that disclosure would endanger the lives of witnesses.
He related the story of a convicted Judaizer, who "discovered who
was the witness that had denounced him. He sought him out, con-
fronted him in a laneway and ran him through with a lance. . . . No
one will come forward to denounce a person at the risk of losing his
life. That spells ruin to the tribunal and leaves the divine cause

32 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

without defense" (Cart. Xim. 263). The regulation remained in place.
Cisneros declared himself satisfied that faults in the procedures had
been corrected and abuses stopped. He envisaged no further need for
reform. On the contrary, he said, "it would be sinful to introduce
changes" (Cart. Xim. 261).

Not everyone shared the Cardinal's view. When King Charles
held his first cortes in 1518, he was deluged with petitions asking him
to ensure that the Suprema observe due process. Plans for a reform
were thwarted, however, by Cisneros' successor, Adrian of Utrecht,
who, like Cisneros, was content with the status quo.

The Moorish Question

One aspect of the Inquisition, the Moorish question, had already
occupied Cisneros before he became Inquisitor General. In January
1492 the Spanish monarchs accepted the surrender of Granada, thus
completing the reconquista. Arabs had invaded the Spanish peninsula
in the eighth century. From the eleventh century on there were at-
tempts to regain these territories. By the thirteenth century some
advances had been made toward this goal, but eventually the pace of
the reconquista was slackened by dynastic crises. In the fifteenth
century, however, especially in the aftermath of the fall of Constanti-
nople, the crusading spirit in Europe revived, and the reconquista was
carried on once again under a religious banner. Six incursions into
Granada in the 1450s brought few concrete results, but popular
enthusiasm for the enterprise remained undiminished. The Catholic
monarchs found the reconquista a convenient means of rallying their
subjects behind the Crown. Their campaign, begun in 1482, success-
fully detached outlying regions until in 1489 only the central region
immediately surrounding the city of Granada remained in Arab
hands. The final conquest came as a result of diplomatic as much as
of military activity. A feud among members of the ruling clan made
Granada vulnerable and allowed the Spaniards to make separate
treaties with disgruntled regional rulers. The city of Granada was
besieged during the spring of 1490. In the fall of 1491, as preparations
for an assault went forward and morale in the Moorish camp deterio-
rated, negotiations led to a surrender of the city.

The terms were liberal: there were to be no confiscations of prop-
erty. The inhabitants were guaranteed freedom of religion, and local
administration and government was left untouched. The new prov-

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 33

ince was ruled by a triumvirate: the royal secretary Fernando de
Zafra, the military commander Inigo Lopez de Mendoza, Count of
Tendilla, and the newly created Archbishop of Granada, Hernando
de Talavera. The archbishop, an enlightened man, was scrupulous in
his adherence to the terms of the treaty, hoping that conversion
could be achieved by persuasion and assimilation. It was his policy to
meet with Muslim leaders {alfaquies) and to encourage the Christian
clergy to learn Arabic and convert the Muslim population by preach-
ing and instruction. He saw to it that portions of Scripture and other
devotional works were translated into Arabic, a practice disapproved
by Cisneros who commented that he "did not want to cast pearls
before swine, that is, give up Holy Writ to those who are not yet
well confirmed in their religion to laugh at and disdain." More
broadly speaking, he was not convinced of the usefulness of vernacu-
lar translations and of giving Scripture into the hands of ordinary
people, let alone recent converts. In this he demonstrated a decidedly
conservative attitude, not at all in keeping with the character of a
"pre-reformer", the role in which he is often cast by historians.
While reform-minded contemporaries like Lefevre d'Etaples, Eras-
mus, and in later years Luther promoted the idea that every Chris-
tian should be able to read the Bible, Cisneros protested that "in this
disastrous and deplorable era, in a decadent world in which the
minds of the common people have declined from the old standard of
purity prevailing in St. Paul's time, there could be no worse sugges-
tion than to publish in the vernacular tongues the sacred words that
were to be heard only by pure and holy men" (Gomez, De rebus
gestis, 105).

Talavera's method yielded results only slowly, too slowly for the
monarchs, who visited Granada in 1499, accompanied by Cisneros.
The royal couple departed after four months, but Cisneros stayed on
and actively pursued the Christianization of the Moors. His interfer-
ence may have been sanctioned by the royal couple, but it is not
entirely clear whether Talavera cooperated as willingly as Cisneros
claimed. The monarchs commented at any rate that they "sensed cer-
tain differences of opinion between the Archbishop of Granada and
the Archbishop of Toledo" (Ladero Quesada, Mudejares, 233). While
in Granada, Cisneros focused his inquisitorial activities on the so-
called helches, Christians who had lived under Muslim rule and con-
verted to their faith or had been forced to adopt Muslim customs.

34 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

Among the cases dealt with by Cisneros was that of Juan de la
Palencia, who had been tortured and imprisoned until he renounced
the Christian faith; the case of a man by name of Andrea, who
related that he had fallen into Turkish hands in Tripoli and was
obliged to live like a Muslim for five years; and that of a citizen of
Granada, who asked for absolution because he had lived in the
Muslim faith for about forty years, although he was born of Chris-
tian parents (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 2:510-11). Most of Cisneros'
personal initiatives were missionary, however. Vallejo tells us that,
like Talavera, he privately summoned the leaders of the community
to persuade them to adopt the Christian faith and by their example
and personal influence to facilitate the conversion of others. For their
persuasion he relied on more than words; he made them splendid
gifts of purple and silk garments, according to their rank. If he did
not succeed in this manner, however, he used coercion. His biogra-
phers relate the cruelties committed in his name and on his orders.
Vallejo {Memorial, 34) tells us, for example, of the treatment received
by a certain Zegri Azaator, a "great noble" and man of consequence
in the Muslim community. "The chaplain [Pedro Ponce de] Leon
kept him for more than twenty days in chains, made him sleep at
night on the floor of the prison where he was kept, made him sweep
the brick floor, and physically maltreated him." Eventually the pris-
oner yielded to the authorities and declared "that he was willing to be-
come a Christian because Allah had revealed to him at night that he
should do so; and if His Lordship wanted everyone converted to Chris-
tianity he should commit them to that Lion [a pun on Leon] of his."
With the fervour of a zealot, Cisneros now forced mass baptisms.
He reported to Pope Alexander VI in December 1499 that some
three thousand Muslims had been converted. Individual baptism was
not possible for such a number, and so water was sprinkled in pass-
ing over the kneeling crowd to initiate them into the Christian faith.
It is also alleged that Cisneros had thousands of Arab books publicly
burned, excepting only books of medicine, philosophy, and history.
The Koran was in his view merely "the chief book of their supersti-
tion" (Gomez, De rebus gestis, 99). His precipitate actions led to a
riot in the city. Three of Cisneros' deputees who had orders to arrest
a young girl, allegedly a relapsed Muslim, were attacked by Muslim
sympathizers, and the confrontation sparked three days of uncon-
trolled rioting, including an attack on Cisneros' house. Revolts on a

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 35

larger scale broke out in the Alpujarra mountains in 1500/1501, but
the lack of concerted and coordinated effort on the part of the rebels
allowed royal troops to seize control with relative ease. A more
serious revolt in the Sierra Bermeja resulted in savage battles and was
put down with greater difficulty. The royal couple was dismayed at
Cisneros' lack of diplomacy and its disastrous results. Once the
revolt was quelled, however, Cisneros regained royal favour. The
forced conversion of Moors continued. Among the few who ac-
knowledged the attendant hypocrisy and bigotry was Pietro Martire
who commented on the mass baptisms: "There are good grounds to
suspect that they will continue living in the spirit of Mohammed. It
is of course hard to abandon the traditions of one's forefathers. I at
any rate believe that it would have been more to the point to accept
their petitions and to impose the new discipline on them gradually"
(Ep. 215).

Cisneros' legal argument was that the rebellion had nullified the
treaty of Granada and entitled the Crown to adopt coercive mea-
sures. In 1502, finally, a decree was passed, expelling all adult Moors
unwilling to convert to Christianity. The options of the exiles were
restricted, moreover, for they were prohibited from going to parts of
the North African coast. Cisneros felt that by preventing their settle-
ment there "the country would remain forever secure, whereas if
they are on the coast or close to it and considering that they are
strong in numbers, they can do much damage, if conditions change"
(Diaz-Plaja, Historia de Espana, 24).

The Expedition of Oran

Cisneros' missionary spirit and militant fervour against the Mus-
lims culminated in the expedition of Oran, a venture which he him-
self financed and organized and which carried his crusade against the
Muslims into Africa. Cisneros' efforts to organize an international
campaign and proposals to this effect made to the Kings of England
and Portugal generated warm responses but no practical help. Manuel
of Portugal replied to his invitation: "I shall with great pleasure link
my arms with those of the Catholic King and I hope that God will
bless our arms and hear the prayers of so great an archbishop, who
considers no other cause so dear to his heart as the destruction of
the sect of Mahomed," but nothing came of a cooperative venture.
Consultations concerning a joint campaign against the infidel by the

36 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

rulers of Spain, England, and France in 1507 (Bergenroth, Letters and
Papers, #528) were similarly without issue.

Cisneros' own plan was to conduct a preliminary campaign against
Mazalquivir (today Mers-el-Kebir) and Cazaza on the North African
coast opposite the Spanish port of Cartagena. Once established, these
garrisons would serve as bases to proceed against the nearby town of
Oran. The political situation in Spain was not conducive to Cisneros'
plans, however. Queen Isabel died in 1504. In her will she expressed
the wish that her husband should devote himself "unremittingly to
the conquest of Africa and the fight against the Muslims for the sake
of faith", but he had to attend to more pressing matters. After Isa-
bel's death the crown passed to her mentally unstable daughter Juana
and her Burgundian husband Philip, leaving Ferdinand in a political-
ly vulnerable position. The relationship between Ferdinand and the
royal couple remained problematic. An agreement to rule jointly
with them was abandoned. In the end he was obliged to relinquish all
powers to his son-in-law. In the wake of his diplomatic defeat he left
for Naples. Within days of his departure, however, Philip died and
Ferdinand's presence was required once more. Until his return in
1507, a regency council under the direction of Cisneros was set up.
The events of 1506/7 will concern us in more detail later.

In the circumstances Cisneros' plan for a campaign against Oran
were delayed. He did, however, successfully complete the first phase.
Under the leadership of Diego Fernandez de Cordoba, and the com-
mand of Ramon de Cardona, an army outfitted by Cisneros estab-
lished a beachhead on the North African shore. Mazalquivir fell in
December 1505, and Cazaza was taken in April 1506. It was clear
that the posts could not be held indefinitely unless the grander plan
of taking Oran was successful as well. Keeping the supply lines to an
isolated garrison was too difficult otherwise. Sporadic Moorish at-
tacks on foraging detachments and on the fort itself soon made an
attack on Oran imperative.

In July 1508 Cisneros and Ferdinand discussed the funding of the
military venture and came to an agreement. Cisneros would be ap-
pointed Capitan General of the campaign. The mayors of Mazalqui-
vir and Cartagena would report to him for the duration of the cam-
paign. Cisneros would bear the cost of maintaining the fleet, would
be responsible for the pay of the soldiers and crew, and would fi-
nance the cost of the campaign itself. Ferdinand would provision the

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 3i7

ships. A complex scheme was drawn up to compensate Cisneros for
his expenses, primarily out of income from tithes. Conquered territo-
ry was to remain under Cisneros' administration until the debt was
paid off. It was to remain under his ecclesiastical authority perma-
nently and be attached to the diocese of Toledo. The agreement was
ratified by both parties, and Pedro Navarro, Count of Oliveto, was
appointed to the military command.

Cisneros personally supervised the provisioning of the army. A
memorandum (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 2:542) lists the quantities of
dry biscuit, barley, salt pork, cheese, fried fish, beans, salt, vinegar,
oil, and water that had been supplied by the King. Cisneros' close
interest in every detail of the expedition caused ill feelings between
him and the military commander, who felt that the cardinal was
infringing on his area of competence. Soldiers, too, commented that
"the world was turned upside down": generals were praying and
prelates preparing for war (Gomez, De rebus gestis, 259). After hectic
preparations over the winter, the fleet was outfitted and ready to
leave from Cartagena in February 1509. There was, however, a muti-
ny over pay, issuing in raucous calls of "The monk is rich, let him
pay," Obliged to yield to blackmail, Cisneros had an advance paid to
the soldiers. The fleet finally set sail in May and reached the coast of
Africa without incident.

We have a brief account of the march on Oran by Maestro Ca-
zalla. Bishop of Troy, who accompanied Cisneros on the expedition.
The fleet set out on Wednesday, March 16, sailed through the night,
and landed at Mazalquivir. Moorish troops observed the landing, but
apparently did not think that the Spanish troops would be capable of
beginning their operation the following day. The forced march
on which the Spaniards embarked on Thursday morning therefore
caught them by surprise. According to Cazalla, "the infantry was
drawn up on land in four very beautiful squadrons of more than two
thousand men each; the cavalry, however, could not disembark as
quickly or in as organized a fashion, although they too made haste"
(Cart. Xim. 243). The Cardinal and his secretary Francisco Ruiz dis-
embarked, mounted mules, and gave orders for the infantry to engage
in battle, since the enemy was now mobilizing their infantry and cav-
alry "and every hour more soldiers arrived, not counting the aid
they expected from Tremecen [modern Tlemcen]" (244). In the en-
suing engagement, the Spaniards were able to put the Moors to flight.

38 Crusader y Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

and "our men followed them without order or direction, as each was
able to run, and therefore they appeared more numerous than they
were." They arrived at Oran, "took all the gates and fought in the
city, especially in the mosques and certain fortified houses where
they encountered resistance. Some, not content with the city, pro-
ceeded without order to the suburbs, catching up with those who
were fleeing with their families and possessions. The Moors now
turned on them and, because they were in disarray, inflicted some
damage, but not a great deal. When that part of the city was occu-
pied, the fleet reached the harbour and there was an exchange of fire
between the city and the fleet, but finally a well-aimed shot de-
stroyed the major cannon with which the Moors were operating, and
a great many people from the ships entered the harbour. Thus they
took the whole city. And before night was over, we were in full
command" (244-5).

Cazalla's letter provides only a rough sketch, but is more realistic
than the highly rhetorical rendition given by Cisneros' biographer,
Gomez de Castro. When the battle lines had been drawn up, he
writes, the archbishop — now almost seventy years old — presented
himself in his ecclesiastical robes and addressed the troops. The
speech cited by Gomez may not be an accurate record of what was
said, but no doubt expresses Cisneros' sentiments:

Knowing your zeal to engage in this holy war, in which both
the glory of God and the welfare of our country are at stake, I
wish to be a witness to your bravery and noble spirit now that
the die is cast, as the proverbial phrase goes. Fpr many years
you have heard the message over and over again: The Moors are
ravaging our coasts; they are dragging our children into slavery;
they are disgracing our wives and daughters; they are insulting
the name of Christ. For a long time now you have longed to
avenge these evils and crimes . . . the mothers of Spain, prostrate
before the altars of God, have entreated the Most High to bless
our undertaking. They are now anxious to see you return in
triumph. In the eye of the mind they see us breaking the chains
of their captive children, and restoring them once more to their
loving arms. The longed-for day has at length arrived. Soldier,
behold before you the accursed land, behold the proud enemy
who insults you, and is now thirsting for your blood. Prove to
the world this day, that it has not been lack of courage on your

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 39

part, but only the want of a fitting opportunity to avenge the
wrongs of your country. As for myself, I wish to be the first in
facing every danger; for I have come here with the resolution to
conquer or to die with you, which God forbid. After all, is
there a better place for the priests of God than the battle-field,
where soldiers are fighting for their country and religion? {De
rebus gestis, 179-%Q)

Gomez, like Cazalla, reports that Oran was taken within hours.
Their accounts also agree in the description of the massacre of the
inhabitants and the looting of their possessions. Cazalla writes that
between four and five thousand Moors, male and female, died, and
many were taken prisoner. "If the cavalry had all disembarked and
followed the advancing infantry in order, all of the Arabs would
have been lost and spoils of infinite value would have been taken,
but even as it was, the booty taken by the soldiers is worth more
than fifteen thousand ducats. . . . On our side some fifteen or twenty
persons died, but one could not walk in the streets of the city, which
is twice as large as Guadalajara, because of the corpses and broken
lances. The harbour as well and the gardens and the houses were full
of corpses — you would not believe it unless you had seen it with
your own eyes" (Cart. Xim. 245).

The following day Cisneros made his solemn entry into the city.
One of his first acts was to release three hundred Christian captives
from the prisons of the city. He obliged them to make a pilgrimage
to Guadalupe in gratitude for having recovered their freedom; and
indeed the chapter proceedings of that church record that in June
1509 "up to 150" came to pay their respects to the shrine. Cisneros
remained in Oran to see that the bodies of the dead were buried
speedily as a safeguard against epidemics. He furthermore ordered
that the two mosques in the city be converted into churches. He also
made provisions for two monasteries and for the establishment of a
tribunal of the Inquisition to ensure that converted Jews would not
use the opportunity to emigrate and renounce their new religion. It
appears from Gomez' account that Cisneros was going to take a
hand also in further plans but found that Navarro was unwilling "to
receive orders from a monk".

Letters written by Cisneros on his return to Spain tell of his tense
relationship with Pedro Navarro. Writing from Cartagena on 24 May
1509, Cisneros asked Lopez de Ayala to combat "lies" circulating at

40 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

court that he had left Oran without paying the army: "Never has an
army been paid so well or provisioned so generously" (Cart. Xim.
41). Another letter, written at Alcala on 12 June 1509, serves the
same purpose. It is addressed to an unnamed "Venerable Father" at
court, perhaps Juan Cazalla, and is meant to be conveyed to Ferdi-
nand. In this letter Cisneros explains that he and Pedro Navarro
"from the time when we joined up in Cartagena until now, have
never seen eye to eye concerning the command" (Cart. Xim. 50). His
captains behaved "like bandits, proceeding along the coast, seizing
and plundering whatever came their way" (51). The two men also
disagreed over the method of payment. Cisneros wanted the money
paid to the soldiers directly rather than their captains "because of the
fraud they usually commit" (51), but his instructions were disregard-
ed by Navarro. The riots preceding the departure of the fleet for
Oran were the result of Navarro's mismanagement of funds. Once
they arrived in Africa, there were more disagreements. "[Navarro]
said that it was on my account that the soldiers refused him obedi-
ence . . . and if I had left matters to him and departed, he would have
conquered all of Africa from there. And so you see that I did what
he wanted me to do. I left him with the command and authorization
he requested and the supplies for which he asked, and I gave him all
the provisions in my posession, worth more than ten thousand
dohles. All the infantry and cavalry was paid and provisioned for
three months" (53).

Cazalla's account of the Oran expedition makes no mention of
Navarro's lack of cooperation as a factor in Cisneros' return to
Spain. He speaks instead of the archbishop's desire to ensure that
supplies would reach the newly established garrison and to widen the
scope of the expedition as motives that hastened his return to Spain.
"All of Africa could be ours," Cazalla writes. "And that is the
reason why the Cardinal our lord made such haste to return and
discuss this with His Highness. . . . We have heard that they tremble
in Tremecen. The fear of the Moors is so great that they have fled as
far as Fez. I hope that within twenty days we shall hear more good
news, of other forts taken" (247). Cazalla's optimism was not quite
justified by the events. Further advances on the African coast had to
wait until 1510.

The winds obliged Cisneros both on crossing into Africa and
returning to Spain, so that it became a common saying that Cisneros

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 41

"had the wind in his sleeves" (Cart. Sec. 44-48; Cart. Xim. 245).
Over the summer a number of directions were issued by the court
concerning the conquered territory. Diego Fernandez de Cordoba
was designated Capitan General of Oran. Cisneros' expenses were
repaid in 1511 after some haggling with the royal accountants.

On his return from the campaign, Cisneros entered Alcala in the
triumphal style of ancient conquerors, preceded by Moorish captives
leading camels loaded with booty destined for the king (Gomez, De
rebus gestis, 305). For himself Cisneros had reserved Arabic manu-
scripts to be deposited in the library of his newly inaugurated univer-
sity at Alcala, and works of art, taken from mosques in Oran, some
of which he distributed to churches in his see. To commemorate the
expedition he had an inscription placed in the cathedral of Toledo
which read in part:

Franciscus Cisneros de Cisneros, Cardinal of Spain and Arch-
bishop of Toledo, advanced from the port of Cartagena with a
huge fleet equipped with troops, military equipment, and sup-
plies. Within two days he reached Mazalquivir, arriving on the
18th day of May, and having spent the night on board ship, the
army disembarked the following day and fought a battle with
the enemy, whom they drove back past the city of Oran. They
arrived at the gates of the city in order and using their pikes to
scale the walls the first soldiers entered the city, planted the
colours of the Christians on the walls, opened the gates on all
sides, so that all the faithful entered together. Some four thou-
sand enemies were slain, the city was captured within four
hours. Thirty men fell on our side, by the will of God, who
lives in the Trinity and reigns for ever and ever, (cf . Hefele 426)

It is difficult to assess the extent of Ferdinand's commitment to a
campaign in North Africa. Pietro Martire, a well-informed source,
was under the impression that "the conquest of Africa constitutes an
obsession with him" (Ep. 435). Ferdinand himself declared piously
that he felt impelled by God to undertake the conquest of North
Africa. Indeed the cortes of Monzon (1510) discussed a crusade into
Egypt and Jerusalem and on this occasion, too, the King declared
that "the conquest of Jerusalem belongs to Us and We have the title
of that kingdom" (Hillgarth, Spanish Kingdoms, 3:571). Such plans,
however, had to be weighed against the importance of securing terri-

42 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

tory in Italy or Navarre. Ferdinand continued to support military
operations against ports in North Africa after Cisneros' return to
Spain, but it appears that his commitment was limited. His principal
goal was the suppression of piracy in the Mediterranean, not territo-
rial expansion. In 1510 Bugia (Bougie), Tripoli, Tenes, and Algiers
were captured under Navarro's command. Navarro also defended
Bougie against Barbarossa in 1515 and was willing to renew the
attack on Djerba, which had eluded him in the campagin of 1510. On
the whole, however, Ferdinand made no concerted effort to conquer
the hinterland and was content to put garrisons into key maritime
points. Cisneros, by contrast, had advocated a more ambitious cam-
paign in the spirit of a crusade. Ferdinand's policy of limited occupa-
tion, though realistic in the circumstances, turned out to be untena-
ble in the long run, and Spain was unable to secure real dominance
over the area. More pressing problems in Europe occupied its mon-
archs over the next two generations, so that the territory was even-
tually lost.

Cisneros and the Beatas

While Cisneros was pressing for the conversion of the Moors, he
was exceptionally lenient in another area traditionally subject to
investigations by the Inquisition: visions and prophecies. The age was
receptive to mysticism with its Utopian vision of a church trium-
phant and the world converted by great spiritual leaders. Meditation
was, moreover, the centrepiece of the Franciscan reform movement
in the fifteenth century. There is also evidence that mysticism and
meditation were ideas cherished by Cisneros personally. Among the
monasteries devoted to meditation (recolectorios) was Salceda, the
retreat chosen by Cisneros before he was called to attend the court.
Cisneros' cousin Garcia Jimenez de Cisneros, abbot of the monas-
tery of Montserrat, was among the champions of mysticism and the
author of Ejercicios based on the ideals of the Devotio Modema. The
Cardinal himself promoted the publication of mystical writings. He
commissioned a Spanish translation of St. John Climacus' Spiritual
Ladder, a compendium of mysticism; of the works of Catherine of
Siena and Angela of Foligno; as well as of Landulf's Meditations on
the Life of Christ and Pseudo-Dionysius' Mystical Theology. He also
sponsored an edition of the Treatise on Spiritual Life of the fourteenth
century mystic San Vicente Ferrer, who recommended meditation as

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 43

a means of overcoming temptations. Interestingly, however, he re-
moved from the edition passages that cautioned readers and urged
them to exercise discretion in accepting the claims of individuals that
they had experienced ecstasy and been subject to visions.

In view of the Cardinal's inclinations, it is not surprising that he
gave his wholehearted support to the famous mystic, Maria de Santo
Domingo, known as La Beata de Piedrahita. He sided with the terti-
ary nun in her battle for reform against the provincial of the Domin-
ican order. Her zeal had made her persona non grata and the object
of an investigation by the papal nuncio Juan Ruffo. Cisneros defend-
ed her claim to divine inspiration and succeeded in having her acquit-
ted. Her apologists, including her confessor Fray Diego de Vitoria,
described her ascetic practices, her ecstasies, and her visions. They
brushed aside accusations of moral impropriety as misinterpretations
of enthusiastic manifestations of affection. Miracles were attributed
to her: she was supposed to have answered theological questions in
trance and borne stigmata during Holy Week.

A somewhat more sceptical account is provided by Martire in a
letter to the Marquis de los Velez in 1512 (Ep. 489):

You may have heard talk about a certain woman from Pie-
drahita, who survives on an infinitesimal quantity of food. She
has been brought to the court. The King, the Cardinal-Primate
of Spain, and the rest of the nobility have visited her. She is the
centre of attention. They call her La Beata. She is carried away
by ecstasies. Her limbs become stiff, you could think her body,
shoulders, legs, and fingers were made of wood, without nerves
or joints, without living colour. She is stretched out stiffly, in a
swoon, inspired in the manner recorded of the Sibyl. She ad-
dresses Christ as if he were present as her friend and bride-
groom; sometimes she addresses the Virgin Mother of God.
And if she has to pass through a narrow door, she asks the Vir-
gin to go ahead and pretends that the Virgin wants her — the
bride of her son — to go first. Then the little Beata says in the
hearing of everyone that she could not be the bride of Christ if
"you. Virgin Mary, had not borne him for me, therefore you
must go first." With these and other conversations (I was about
to say, nonsense) of this sort, she has the court mesmerized.
Then she speaks familiarly with Christ, and appears to dwell
with him as his bride, whereas those who are in her presence

44 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

see nothing. The Cardinal, who is the Inquisitor General, and
others who have this responsibility, have examined her and
seem to approve of what she does. Thus she was acquitted and
let go. Many Dominicans (to whose institution she belongs and
whose habit she is wearing) have decried this; others follow the
Beata and praise her holy life to the stars. They are bitterly
divided over this matter. On one side they call for an end to
this superstition; on the other they argue in her support. Their
disagreement amuses the people. The authority of King and
Cardinal, who have examined the woman's character and have
refused to condemn her, increases the number of her followers
who believe that she is divinely inspired.

Many of her followers asked the Beata to wear articles belonging to
them to share in her inspiration. The Cardinal himself requested that
she wear a Franciscan scapular on his behalf. What may have en-
deared her particularly to him was her vision of his success at Oran.
"At the time when the Lord Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo was in
Africa and at the head of the army," her confessor reported, "this hand-
maiden of God saw the image of Christ crucified among the army
and prophesied many things" (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 1:245, n. 142).

Similar prophecies were supposedly made by another beata who
enjoyed Cisneros' support, Marta de la Cruz, also of Toledo. She,
however, "made a solemn vow not to tell him until [what she had
seen in a vision] had happened" (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 1:249). She
corresponded with Cisneros during the years 1511-12 and shared
with him her views, or rather visions, about the political develop-
ments in Italy and assured him of her prayers. Cisneros also corre-
sponded with Santa Juana de la Cruz, a tertiary Franciscan from
Cubas. Because of the Cardinal's connection with her, the superior
of the Franciscan monastery of Ocafia felt it his duty to report to
him that the beata had received a proposition from one of his
monks, who "in his prayers had received a command from God to
impregnate her with a son, a saint". Apparently incarceration made
the monk see the error of his ways (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 1:255).

Some mystics promoted the idea of a crusade that would transfer
the papacy to Jerusalem and initiate a reform of the world. Maria de
Santo Domingo in particular saw Cisneros in the role of the reform-
ing pope. Similarly, the French philosopher Charles de Bovelles, a
disciple of Lefevre and like him inclined to mysticism, was made

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 45

welcome by the Cardinal in 1506, He predicted a reconquest of the
Holy Land within twelve years and the imminent conversion of the
world to Christianity. After Cisneros' victory at Oran he encouraged
him to extend his crusade to Jerusalem. Another visionary in Cis-
neros' circle was Fray Melchor, a wandering spirit who, disappointed
with regular orders, had turned for inspiration to the beatas Maria
de Santo Domingo and Marta de la Cruz. He too foretold the con-
version of the Moors within a twelve-year period. Protected during
Cisneros' lifetime by the Cardinal's solid belief in their prophetic
powers and the patronage of the court, these visionaries escaped the
scrutiny of the Inquisition. Soon after the Cardinal's death, however,
their claims to divine inspiration were probed and in some cases
revealed as fraud, in others ascribed to diabolical influences and thus
subjected to the due process of ecclesiastical laws. Many of the mysti-
cal tracts, moreover, that were published with the approval and sup-
port of Cisneros ended up on the Index of Prohibited Books.

Cisneros and the Missions in the New World

Cisneros' missionary zeal led him to take an active interest in the
Christianization of the indigenous population in the Americas. His
first involvement was through his secretary and confidant, Francisco
Ruiz, who joined a group of Franciscans leaving for Espanola in July
1500. In 1493 the Observant Franciscans had been holding a chapter
meeting at Florenzac in southern France, when they heard of Colum-
bus' return from his first voyage and his report to the court, then at
Barcelona. The news of the discovery of a "new world" was greeted
with missionary enthusiasm by the friars, as Nicolas Glassberger, the
Franciscan chronicler, reported (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 2:598-9; cf.
Tibesar, "Franciscan Province," 378):

[In 1493] certain experienced merchants and sailors, with the
financial support of the King, and after great and serious diffi-
culties and risks, discovered in the most remote parts of the
ocean verging toward India certain new islands inhabited by
barbarian tribes, as naked as animals and completely ignorant of
the Christian faith. When these news came to the notice of cer-
tain mature and zealous Brothers of our Observant Order in the
Province of France, they were incensed like an elephant who
has seen blood, and they were moved to seek an interview with
the Vicar General, Olivier Maillard, who had just concluded the

46 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

general ultramontane chapter meeting in Florenzac and to ask
him for permission to sail to the new lands, for they were eager
to give witness as martyrs. The lay brothers Juan de La Deule
and Juan Cosin, two men in excellent health and disposed to
suffer for God anything required of them [were chosen]. . . .
They knew that a fleet was departing for the newly discovered
lands. They offered to accompany the sailors, who received
them gladly, when they saw that they were of good health,
honest and devout, for they thought they would be a great help
during the voyage, both because of their bodily strength and
their spiritual fervour.

When they arrived at the new islands, they encountered a
problem: They did not know the language of the people. How-
ever, they persevered in their work for five years with great
difficulty and finally succeeded in learning to speak the language
of those tribes. In the meantime the clothes they had brought
were beginning to rot. One of them therefore undertook to spin
silk and make tunics or habits so that they would not have to
go around naked. After five years of work, when they saw that
the natives were well disposed to accepting the Catholic faith,
they decided to turn to Spain in search of priests, for they
themselves were lay brothers.

The two Franciscans accordingly returned to Spain in 1500. Among
their recruits were three associates of Cisneros, Juan de Trastierra,
Juan de Robles, and his confidant and mayordomo, Francisco Ruiz.
In October 1500 Deule and Robles informed Cisneros of the success
of the new mission, but reported — not surprisingly — that the new
recruits were prostrated with heat. A memorandum to Cisneros,
probably authored by Trastierra, describes the objectives of the
mission and asks for Cisneros' help in reaching them. There was a
need for financial support and for priests, the author of the memo-
randum wrote. He also suggested the creation of a bishop to whose
spiritual care the islanders could be entrusted. Concubinage between
Spaniards and native women received special attention in the memo-
randum, particularly the cases of married men with families in Spain
who had fathered children in the colonies. Ruiz, too, wrote a num-
ber of letters to the Cardinal. Both Ruiz and Trastierra had an oppor-
tunity to follow up on their reports in person, Ruiz in 1503 when an
illness forced him to return and Trastierra in 1504 when he came to

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 47

Spain to lobby for an enlarged mission. As a result of Trastierra's
representations and Cisneros' efforts, it was decided at the general
chapter of Laval (1505) to establish a separate province in Espanola.
It was named the Franciscan Observant Province of the Holy Cross
of the Indies. There is evidence that Juan de Trastierra himself was
the first vicar general, followed by Alonso de Espinar and Pablo de
Solis. Their successor, Pedro Mexia, regarded himself a disciple of
Cisneros and received the Cardinal's personal support when he
requested that more friars be sent to Espanola (Garcia Oro, Cisneros,
2:660). Cisneros was no doubt also behind the generous material
support given by the Crown to the next group of missionaries setting
out for Espanola. The establishment of a school, a project fostered by
Espinar and Mexia, also had Cisneros' approval and support. In the
fifteen-twenties, however, the new province began to decline, as a
considerable number of missionaries left Espanola for new colonies
on the mainland. In spite of Mexia's efforts to revive the province,
the trend proved irreversible, and by 1559 the island had lost its
status as a province.

The Franciscans became involved in the discussion over native
rights in 1512, when a dispute broke out between the colonists on
Espaiiola and newly arrived Dominican missionaries. The vicar of a
recently founded Dominican monastery, Antonio Montesinos, a
powerful speaker, vigorously attacked the treatment of natives by the
colonists. As a result hearings were held in Spain, in which Mon-
tesinos was the complainant and the Franciscan provincial Espinar
represented the views of the colonists. For this he earned the con-
tempt of the "Apostle of the Indies", Bartolome de las Casas, who
accused him of "furthering the cause of servitude." He left it open
whether the provincial was naive or truckling to the interests of the
colonists. In any case, he noted sarcastically, the court treated Espi-
nar "like a canonized saint" {History of the Indies, III. 5).

Royal directives concerning the treatment of the native popula-
tion had gone out to individual colonies on Queen Isabel's initiative,
but her provisions, designed to give a measure of protection to in-
digenous workers, were rarely enforced. The Laws of Burgos (1512/
13) constituted a first effort at drawing up general regulations govern-
ing the social and political relationship between conquerors and con-
quered. They rested on the assumption of the cultural superiority of
Europeans and their right to impose control, by force if necessary.

48 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

on a people perceived as morally inferior. The laws were only mod-
erately successful as an instrument of curtailing existing abuses or
protecting the indigenous population from ruthless exploitation by
colonists. The system of encomiendas, which had institutionalized
forced labour, was economically profitable to those in control and
therefore not easily modified, let alone abolished.

Bartolome de Las Casas

Not everyone in Spain or in the Indies shared the views embodied
in the Laws of Burgos which stamped the indigenous population as
"idle and vicious." They found an eloquent spokesman in the Do-
minican Bartolome de las Casas, who came to the Spain in 1516 to
present their case to King Ferdinand.

Las Casas, the son of a merchant from Seville, had gone to the
Indies in 1502 to take part in the family business of farming and
trading. He became the owner of two encomiendas, instructing the
Indians entrusted to him in the Catholic faith, as stipulated by the
charter, and treating them humanely. However, he could not fail to
observe the cruelty of other settlers. In 1506 he travelled to Rome
and entered the priesthood. After his return to the Indies, he came
under the influence of Antonio de Montesinos. The sermons of the
Dominican preacher are quoted in Las Casas' History of the Indies:

By what right or justice do you hold these Indians in such a
cruel and horrible servitude? On what authority have you waged
such detestable wars against these peoples, who dwelt quietly and
peacefully on their own lands? . . . Why do you keep them so
oppressed and exhausted, without giving them enough to eat or
curing them of the sicknesses they incur from the excessive la-
bour you give them, and they die, or rather you kill them, in
order to extract and acquire gold every day? And what care do
you take that they should be instructed in religion, so that they
may know their God and creator, may be baptized, may hear
Mass, and may keep Sundays and feast days? Are they not men?
Do they not have rational souls? {Witness, 67)

Responding to Montesinos' appeal, Las Casas divested himself of his
encomiendas, and began a vigorous campaign against the institution.
In his History of the Indies (11.13) he also reflected on the activity of
the Franciscans in Espanola. In his opinion, no more thought was

Crusader, Missionaryy Guardian of the Faith 49

given to the Indians than if they had been "sticks or stones, cats or
dogs". And that was the attitude not only of the governor himself
and the colonists to whom the Indians were committed, but even of
the Franciscans "who were good people," Las Casas conceded, but
who did nothing about this matter and had no aspirations other than
"to live a life of devotion in [the governor's] house in the city and in
another which they built in La Vega." He admitted, however, that
they lived exemplary lives and may have impressed the native popu-
lation in this indirect but no less effective manner. "They asked per-
mission to have with them the sons of some caciques (few of them,
to be sure), perhaps four, whom they taught to read and write.
Beyond that I do not know what they learned from them in matters
of Christian doctrine and good habits, other than by good example,
for they were good men and lived a good life" (ibid.).

In 1515 Las Casas travelled to Spain and sought an audience with
King Ferdinand, lobbying for stronger legislation to protect the In-
dians. According to his own account, he "made known to him the
destruction of these lands and the violent deaths of their native
peoples; how the Spaniards, by their avarice, were killing them, how
all were perishing without faith and without sacraments, and that if
His Highness did not assist shortly with a remedy, all the lands
would soon become wilderness" {Witness, 80). His endeavours were
blocked, however, by the royal secretary Lope Conchillos and the
Bishop of Burgos, Juan Rodriguez de Fonseca, who was in charge of
affairs in the Indies. Both were encomenderos and had reason to pre-
vent Las Casas from gaining the King's ear. Conchillos tried to bribe
him to withdraw; the bishop ridiculed his concerns. "Behold, what
a witty fool!" he said, according to Las Casas, when told of the suf-
ferings of the Indians. "What is that to me, and what is that to the
King?" {Witness, 82). Las Casas was not deterred, however, and, after
Ferdinand's death in January 1516, took his case to Cisneros, then
regent of Castile, and to Charles' representative, Adrian of Utrecht.
He addressed memoranda to them, in which he described the impact
of the harsh working conditions in mines on the health and welfare
of the workers, many of them children. At a subsequent meeting
with the regent, he noted that the Laws of Burgos were not observed
and, to make his point, asked that they be read aloud. He describes
the encounter:

50 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

A servant and official of Secretary Conchillos read the laws.
And when he arrived at the law ordering Indians who worked
on estates or farms to be given a pound of meat every eight
days or on feast days, he wanted to conceal that, perhaps be-
cause it affected him or his friends, and he read it in a different
way from the way it was written. But [Las Casas] who had
studied it carefully and knew it by heart, said at once there in
the presence of all: "That law doesn't say any such thing." The
cardinal ordered the reader to go back and read it again. He
read it in the same way. [Las Casas] said: "That law doesn't say
any such thing." The cardinal, as if angry at the cleric and sup-
porting the reader said: "Be quiet, or consider what you are say-
ing." [Las Casas] replied: "May your most reverend lordship
order my head struck off if what notary so-and-so recites is
truly what that law says."

Cisneros then took the book from the reader's hands and confirmed
the truth of Las Casas' protestations. As a result, he ordered an inves-
tigation, delegating the task jointly to Las Casas, Montesinos, and the
jurist Lopes de Palacios Rubios. Their submission, which recom-
mended the elimination of encomiendas and an end to forced labour,
was accepted in principle and Las Casas entrusted with its execution.
In this task he was to be aided by three members of the Jeronimite
order: Alonso de Santo Domingo, prior of San Juan de Ortega near
Burgos, Luis de Figueroa, prior of the monastery La Mejorada, and
Bernaldino de Manzanedo, prior of Monta-Marta near Zamora. In
September 1516, Cisneros and Adrian signed papers giving Las Casas
authority "to reform the Indies and advise other people in charge of
the same task about the freedom, good treatment, the spiritual and
physical health of the Indians." The document granted Las Casas
"full powers, including contingencies, dependencies, emergencies,
annexations and associations attendant thereon" and appointed him
"procurator and universal protector of all Indians in the Indies, with
a salary of 100 gold pesos per year" {History of the Indies, III.90).

Cisneros reported on his initiative to King Charles. "Concerning
the Indies," he wrote to Brussels, "I was informed about the bad gov-
ernment prevailing there, and about the aggravations and maltreat-
ment the Indians have received. I have therefore agreed to send there
certain religious from the Order of St. Jerome, who are persons of
prudence and complete devotion. I have given them certain instruc-

Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith 51

tions to examine matters and make provisions, as necessary to the
service of God and Your Highnesses" (Cart. Xim. 188). The instruc-
tions to the Jeronimites had a general preamble outlining their
powers which were followed by a detailed and specific list of mea-
sures to be taken. They were to "investigate the situation by request-
ing information, under oath if necessary, from the settlers and other
sources; to study the means by which to preserve the natives and the
land; ... to stop oppression, punish wrongdoers, and see to it that
from now on Indians are treated as the Christian free men they are
in reality. Therefore, the caciques must inform their people and hold
meetings discussing what should be done to remedy their situation,
and solutions found amenable to both Indians and Spaniards will
be taken into account . . . When the Fathers report their findings to
the Indian population, they must be accompanied by religious men
known to those Indians as trustworthy people in order to win their
confidence and interpret their language" {History of the Indies, III. 88).
Las Casas envisaged the establishment of Indian communities that
would fully provide for their own welfare. In spite of its Utopian
cast, however, his grand plan perpetuated Spanish control. The vil-
lages, although headed by their native caciques, were to be supervised
by a Spanish administrator whose task it was to "cooperate with the
priest to see that Indians dress properly, sleep in beds, take care of
their tools and are satisfied with their wives. A husband should not
abandon his wife and the wife must be chaste" (ibid.). It was hoped
that even the ranks of caciques would eventually be filled by Span-
iards. They were encouraged to marry the daughters of Indian cac-
iques, so that they might "become the town cacique and enjoy the
same rights and privileges as other caciques. This way, it is hoped
that all caciques will soon be Spaniards" (ibid.). Nor was the concept
of forced labour entirely abandoned, although the workers were now
assured a share of the profit: "Men between the ages of 20 and 50
will be forced to work in the mines in three shifts, rotating every
two months or whatever period of time the cacique shall establish.
When an individual is sick or kept away from work, he will be re-
placed by another from another shift. They will leave for work at
about sunrise, take three hours for mealtime at home, and will return
to work until sunset. No woman shall be forced to go to the mines
unless she so wishes, in which case she is to be counted as a man in
the making up of a shift . . . When not working in the mines, Indians

52 Crusader, Missionary, Guardian of the Faith

will work their own land within sight of the priest or the administra-
tor . . . Indians must work their land when not on their shifts and be
helped in this by women and children" (ibid.).

Cisneros also wished to see the justice system reformed. For this
purpose he appointed the jurist Alonso Zuazo, a competent and prin-
cipled man, but his departure was delayed for some time by those
who stood to lose from his investigation. In the end Cisneros himself
intervened to expedite his mission. According to Las Casas, he sum-
moned the responsible individuals, "asking them to produce the
documents [authorizing Zuazo] and sign them on the spot, which
they did, making their signatures in such a way as to be able to prove
to the King that they had done this against their will. Thus Zuazo
now had official authority, much to the sorrow of those who had
private interests in the Indies" {History of the Indies, III.90).

Las Casas and the Jeronimite commissioners departed for the
Indies in December 1516; Zuazo followed in April 1517. Official cor-
respondence between Cisneros and the Casa de Contratacion show
that he was concerned with the financial and administrative details
facilitating their mission (Cedillo, Cisneros, 290-1). He furthermore
sent out fourteen Franciscan missionaries, asking that they stay in
contact with the Jeronimites and rely on their support. His office
was also petitioned by individuals seeking redress in cases involving
grants of indigenous labourers, but these were referred to the Jeroni-
mite commissioners. Their efforts to implement the measures listed
in their authorization was naturally met with hostility and deter-
mined resistance. Ironically the commissioners suggested that black
slaves be imported to supplant indigenous labour, an idea to which
Cisneros objected. After Cisneros' death, however, they successfully
petitioned Charles for a licence to import African slaves into Espa-
nola, because the number of indigenous workers was insufficient to
sustain the colonists' efforts. The Jeronimites, then, were swayed by
considerations for the interests of the colonists, and the idealistic
plans of Las Casas remained largely unimplemented. In 1519/1520,
finally, their mandate was ended. On Charles' orders, the commis-
sioners returned to Spain. Zuazo 's mission was similarly terminated.

The University of Alcald and
the Complutensian Polyglot

1 he foundation of the university of Alcala, more than any other
enterprise, establishes Cisneros' credentials as a figure of the Renais-
sance. The will to sponsor a cultural institution of this magnitude
speaks of the Archbishop's commitment to learning. The financial
and organizational difficulties surrounding the building project itself
and the efforts to secure official status for the institution further
attest to Cisneros' cultural concerns. It is his support for language
studies, however, that give Alcala a place in the history of human-
ism. Although it is perhaps an exaggeration to speak of the homo
complutensis, the "Alcala scholar", as a unique type representing
Spanish Renaissance humanism (Andres, Teologia espanola, 40), the
significance of the university is undisputed. The focus on language
studies and the philological approach to biblical scholarship practised
at Alcala were innovative and, at the time, regarded as controversial.
In conservative circles the application of philological principles to an
inspired text met with indignation. The first biblical humanists —
Lorenzo Valla in Italy, Jacques Lefevre in France, and Desiderius
Erasmus in the Low Countries — were targets of numerous polemics.
Cisneros, by contrast, welcomed humanists at his university and sup-
ported their philological and textual researches. He did, however,
retain a measure of control over the publication of their findings, as
we shall presently see.

The College of San Ildefonso, where the three biblical languages,
Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, were taught, was the heart of the new
university (a separate Collegium Trilingue was built after the Cardi-
nal's death, in 1528). Alcala has been compared with similar founda-
tions providing for instruction in the biblical languages at Louvain
and Paris. There are, however, significant differences in institutional
character between Alcala and the North European foundations. The
Collegium Trilingue at Louvain, privately financed out of the legacy

54 The University ofAlcald

of Jerome de Busleiden, and the college founded under the patronage
of the French King Francis I (eventually named College royal, and
known from the nineteenth century on as College de France), were
institutions run parallel to or separate from the old-established uni-
versities at Louvain and Paris. The lecturers found themselves in
competition, and at times in conflict, with the Faculties of Theology
at those universities. At Alcala instruction in the three languages was
an integral part of the university curriculum (Ezquerra, "Le mo-
dele," 232). A harmonious relationship normally prevailed between
the holders of the chairs in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin and other
faculty members. The focus at Alcala was on the training of clerics,
and it was for this purpose primarily that the biblical languages were
taught. According to the constitution, language studies "must be the
principal object of theologians," for it was through Hebrew, Greek,
and Latin that God's Word was disseminated (de la Torre, "Univer-
sidad de Alcala," 51). While the Faculties of Theology at Paris and
Louvain rejected the idea that language studies were a necessary pre-
requisite for theological studies, Cisneros was convinced of their
merit and gave them a central place in the curriculum.

The foundation of the university was not only an act of cultural
patronage but can also be seen as an extension of Cisneros' pro-
gramme of religious reform and his quest for a better-educated clergy.
A papal bull of 1497 ("Inter caetera") commissioned Cisneros and
the inquisitor Diego de Deza to undertake visitations of academies
[estudios generates) and universities. The papal brief makes specific
mention of Salamanca and Valladolid, but more generally directs the
two men to visit whatever other academies and universities might be
in need of reform, empowers them "to correct and change their stat-
utes and regulations" and envisages the foundation of new institu-
tions {Archivum Secretum Vaticanum, Reg. Vat. 873, fol. 446 verso).
Conditions at Valladolid and Salamanca were accordingly scrutinized
in 1500 and 150L Cisneros furthermore made plans for two new
universities in Seville and in Alcala. Only the second project was
realized during his lifetime. Predictably, Cisneros' design met with
resistance from the old-established University of Salamanca, which
feared competition, but his plans had the support of the Crown.
Cisneros persuaded the royal couple to assume patronage and to
sponsor his foundation with an annual subvention, guaranteeing its
autonomy.

The University o/Alcald 55

Alcala, the ancient Roman Complutum, obtained its modern
name under its Muslim rulers. Al-Qul'aya, "the little castle", was
recaptured in 1114 by the Spaniards under King Alfonso VI and at-
tached to the archbishopric of Toledo. An Estudio General was estab-
lished in the city in 1293, and in 1479 St. Justus and Pastor became
its collegiate church. A first step toward raising the estudio general in
Alcala to the level of a university was taken by Archbishop Alfonso
Carillo, who approached Pope Innocent VIII and in 1487 obtained
his approval for a foundation in Alcala that would consist not only
of a faculty of Arts, but also have chairs in theology and canon law.
The following year the pope approved the necessary benefices for the
support of professors (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 2:258). Cisneros revived
the project and obtained another privilege from Pope Alexander in
1499. He had, however, more ambitious plans and applied further-
more for permission to establish a "doctoral church", that is, one
whose canons all had doctorates and taught at the university — an
honour to be shared only with Louvain. This privilege, however, was
granted only after his death in a papal bull of 1519.

Cisneros began assembling properties earmarked in the accounts
"for the construction of a college" (Meseguer, "Documentos," 36-7)
in the mid-nineties. In 1498 he made the protonotary Alfonso de
Herrera his agent in Rome and set in motion the process of arranging
the necessary finances, linking benefices with university posts, and
obtaining the privilege of conferring academic degrees. The corner-
stone for the first building, the College of San Ildefonso, was laid in
the spring of 1499 by Cisneros himself, who blessed the structure and
placed into the foundation commemorative gold and silver coins.
The plans for the university had been drawn up by the celebrated
Spanish architect Pedro Gumiel. He faced technical difficulties as the
designated place was low-lying and had to be drained. In spite of
Gumiel's measures and renewed efforts in the 1530s to sanitize the
town, the site remained a breeding ground for malaria. The architect
had instructions to sacrifice beauty to efficiency, and tradition has it
that King Ferdinand, on a visit to Alcala, commented on the utilita-
rian brick buildings, chaffing the archbishop that the structure did
not seem "very durable for an institution which you want to be eter-
nal." Cisneros is said to have answered complacently that he would
leave it to future generations to "dress in marble and stone what I
have built in brick" (Quintano, Historia, 144). Construction proceed-

56 The University ofAlcald

ed over the next years and Cisneros himself resided in the city as
often as health and government business permitted.

The major college was that of San Ildefonso, named after the
patron saint of Toledo. In addition there were seven minor colleges
and a hospice for poor students. Several monastic orders also estab-
lished houses of their own to give their young religious an oppor-
tunity of studying at Alcala. There was, moreover, a residence for
young women, attached to San Juan de la Penitencia. The "Colegio
para doncellas," as Gomez calls it, offered instruction to daughters of
poor families. Although the institution has been touted by some
scholars as "revolutionary" and a significant step in the history of
the education of women, there is no hard evidence that the pupils
received any training beyond basic instruction in reading and writing
and in the traditional skills of sewing, weaving, and other household
tasks (Escandell Bonet, Estudios Cisnerianos, 206-16).

The new university opened its doors in 1508 with five hundred
new students and seven professors from Salamanca, a university with
which it was soon engaged in active competition. By 1509 it was
fully operational. The academic community expanded rapidly. A
number of lecturers were recruited, or rather repatriated, from Paris.
Sources from the sixteenth century differ on the number of chairs
founded by Cisneros, listing between 42 and 48. The twelve chairs
mentioned by his biographer Gomez de Castro are the most notable
ones. He lists the following subjects: theology, logic and philosophy,
medicine, Greek, Hebrew, rhetoric, and canon law. The constitution
of the university (article 45) firmly established the hierarchy of disci-
plines: "Theology uses the remaining arts and sciences as hand-
maids." While the hierarchy was traditional, the theological pro-
gramme was not. Cisneros added a chair in Scotism to the traditional
chairs in Thomism and Nominalism. It was the first Scotist chair in
Spain. No doubt Cisneros, being a Franciscan, wanted to honour the
Franciscan doctor. Duns Scotus, whose teachings were well estab-
lished in Northern Europe. The innovation caused the university of
Salamanca some alarm, but eventually resulted in its following suit.
The constitutions of the university specifically prohibited the teach-
ing of "sophisms" and "calculations", but logic and science contin-
ued to be taught side by side with language studies.

Cisneros continued to take an active interest in the operations of
his university. From time to time he deposited in the university

The University ofAlcald 57

books and articles of museal interest. When he confiscated Arabic
books in Granada, he had the medical books (about "thirty or forty
volumes," according to Vallejo, Memorial, 35) set aside and sent to
Alcala; on another occasion he was given a number of idols aban-
doned by American Indians converted to the Christian faith: "hor-
rible shapes of evil spirits, with eyes and teeth made of fishbone and
. . . legs and ears of cotton" (ibid., 45). At another time he sent to
Alcala a staff of exotic wood belonging to a Muslim kadi, seized in
North Africa (ibid., 84). We also know from correspondence directed
to him by university officials that Cisneros was consulted on the
question of granting special leave to professors, and asked to read
recommendations concerning new appointments and consider re-
quests for remuneration above the regular salary. He was also kept
informed about the quality of teaching and the number of students
enrolled in certain courses. One letter written in 1512 supplies figures
for students attending theology courses that year. There were slightly
more Scotists (15) than Thomists (13). Overall attendance figures
show that the university was still primarily an undergraduate institu-
tion, with more than two hundred enrolled in the basic Summulae
course (de la Torre, "Universidad de Alcala," 414-17).

Significantly, the history of scholarly publications at Alcala is in-
tricately linked with Cisneros' initiative. Earlier publications issuing
from the local printer Stanislas Polono were exclusively in the ver-
nacular. In 1510 Cisneros invited Arnao Guillen de Brocar of Lo-
grono to establish a branch office in Alcala. Although religious
tracts, in Spanish and Latin, were its staple, the firm also issued nu-
merous works of classical Greek and Roman authors, most of them
critical editions by professors of the University of Alcala. Among
those produced between 1514 and 1530 were: Persius, Cicero, Plau-
tus, Seneca, Curtius Rufus, Demosthenes, Isocrates, Xenophon, Liba-
nius, Lucian, Cornelius Nepos, Valerius Flaccus, Quintilian, Caesar,
and Plutarch. However, the most important work published by the
firm of Guillen de Brocar was the Polyglot Bible.

The Complutensian Polyglot

A by-product of Cisneros' promotion of the three biblical lan-
guages was the preparation of a polyglot edition of the Bible. Accord-
ing to Vallejo, the Cardinal first conceived of this ambitious project
in 1502. It fit in well with his programme of religious reform, which

58 The University ofAlcald

included efforts to redirect and focus theology on the sources of
Christian faith. Known by the Latin name for Alcala as the "Com-
plutensian Polyglot", the edition continued in the tradition of
Origen's famous Hexapla, a multilingual version of the Old Testa-
ment. The Complutensian edition supplied, in parallel columns, the
text of the complete Bible. It consisted of six folio volumes. The first
four contained the Old Testament in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, as
well as the Chaldaic (Syriac) text for the Pentateuch. The fifth vol-
ume, which was printed first and bears a colophon of 10 January
1514, contained the Greek and Latin texts of the New Testament.
Small reference letters denoted corresponding phrases in the Old
Testament Hebrew and the Latin translation. The same practice was
observed in the fifth volume, marking corresponding phrases in the
New Testament Greek and the Latin translation. The ordinary He-
brew diacritics were omitted in print, as were the usual Greek ac-
cents and breathing marks. The sixth volume provided Hebrew and
Chaldaic lexica and other study aids, such as a Hebrew grammar and
interpretations of proper names. The printing was completed in 1517
(Volume Four bears the latest colophon date, 10 July 1517), but the
editors delayed publication while awaiting papal authorization. This
was obtained in March 1520. Shortly thereafter distribution of the
books finally began.

Although Cisneros may have planned the project as early as
Vallejo indicates, work does not seem to have begun in earnest until
after Arnao Guillen de Brocar established his printing press in Al-
cala. Guillen de Brocar, who had first set up shop in Pamplona and
begun printing in 1490, had moved his press to Logrono in 1502.
There he printed a number of works by Antonio Nebrija. The well-
known philologist, who was also one of the collaborators on the
Polyglot, may well have recommended Guillen de Brocar to the
Cardinal. Although the printer already possessed a Greek type, it
appears that he acquired in preparation for the new project (and per-
haps with the financial aid of the Cardinal) two new Greek founts,
as well as a new Roman and two Hebrew founts.

In the meantime Cisneros had assembled a group of distinguished
scholars and was actively engaged in collecting and purchasing manu-
script texts. According to his biographer, Gomez, he spent 4000 duc-
ats on seven Hebrew manuscripts. The Prologue of the Polyglot
states that the Greek and Latin manuscripts used were "neither of

The University of Alcald 59

the common type or brought together without thought, but were the
oldest and most correct exemplars, which our most holy lord, Pope
Leo X, who favoured our enterprise, sent to us from the papal li-
brary. They were of such integrity that if one cannot fully trust
them, there are seemingly no others worth consulting. We also used
in addition a considerable number of other manuscripts, some of
them copied with the greatest care from Bessarion's most correct
codex and sent to us by the illustrious senate of Venice, others ac-
quired by ourselves with great effort and at great expense from di-
verse places, so that we might have correct codices in abundance."
For the Latin text the editors used manuscripts "of venerable age,
but mostly those that are in the public library of our university at
Alcala, written more than eight hundred years ago in Gothic letters"
{Historical Catalogue, 3). Unfortunately, only a few of the manu-
scripts used by the editors have been identified (Bentley, Humanists,
92-3).

The distribution of labour among the editors of the Polyglot
remains a matter of some discussion (Bentley, Humanists, 74-91). It
appears that the Hebrew text was the responsibility of the converses
Pablo Coronel and Alfonso de Zamora. The preparation of the
Greek text was most likely entrusted to Hernan Nunez de Guzman
and Demetrios Ducas, the latter a native Cretan who had worked as
an editor for the famous Aldine Press in Venice and more recently
for Guillen de Brocar. Ducas was the only non-Spaniard on the edi-
torial team. It was no doubt his experience and the quality of his
work that recommended him to Cisneros. Other collaborators
mentioned in the sources are Juan de Vergara and Diego Lopez de
Ziiniga, who may have worked on the preparation of the Vulgate.
Vergara obtained his doctorate in theology at the university of
Alcala in 1517. As previously mentioned, he was Cisneros' secretary
during the last two years of his life and was given canonries at Alcala
and Toledo. After Cisneros' death he remained in the service of his
successor, Guillaume de Croy. Lopez de Ziiniga, a graduate of Sala-
manca and a competent scholar in the biblical languages, became em-
broiled in controversies with the biblical humanists Jacques Lefevre
and Desiderius Erasmus, in whose translations and annotations he
discovered "heresies". He pursued these polemics contrary to Cis-
neros' advice. After the Cardinal's death he moved to Rome and
published his criticism in spite of prohibitions by the College of

60 The University ofAlcala

Cardinals, making use of the confusion reigning after the death of
Pope Adrian VI in 1523.

Best known among the editors was the philologist Elio Antonio
de Nebrija, who moved to the University of Alcala in 1513 from
Salamanca, where he had occupied the chair of grammar. Nebrija (c.
1444-1522) had been exposed to humanism during his studies in Italy
in the 1460s and brought a breath of the New Learning to Salamanca
on his return. He emphasized that he had gone to Italy, not to fur-
ther his career, but to further learning, "not to obtain a benefice or
learn the formulae of civil and canon law, or do business, but ... to
restore the long lost authors of Latin, who have now been exiled
from Spain for many centuries." Nebrija championed not only a
revival of classical Latin, but also the purification of the vernacular.
He did important studies on Spanish grammar, publishing a Latin-
Spanish dictionary in 1492, and was accepted as an authority on phi-
lological questions. When he applied his knowledge to biblical stud-
ies, however, he aroused the suspicions of the Inquisitor-General,
Diego de Deza, who confiscated his papers. Fortunately for Nebrija,
Cisneros, who admired his scholarship, succeeded Deza in 1507. He
released the papers to the author, who published them under the title
of Tenia Quinquagena, that is, fifty annotations concerning biblical
usage and the etymology of biblical names.

In an Apologia addressed to Cisneros, Nebrija defends himself
against the accusation that he had dared to touch on theological mat-
ters, although he had no formal training in theology. He found it
ironic that he could have chosen to write about literary trifles and
enjoyed popularity, whereas choosing to write about serious matters
close to every Christian's heart he had exposed himself to obloquy,
was depicted as "a bold and sacrilegious falsifier" and came close to
"being charged with impiety, shackled, and forced to defend [him-
self] in court." Nebrija insisted on the value of philology in establish-
ing the correct text of the Bible: "Whenever there are variants in the
Latin text of the New Testament, we must have recourse to the
Greek manuscripts; whenever there is a disagreement among diverse
Latin manuscripts or between the Latin and Greek manuscripts of
the Old Testament, we must apply the standard of the Hebrew origi-
nal" (Nebrija, Apologia, al verso-a2 verso).

In 1513 Cisneros invited Nebrija to join the team of biblical
scholars working on the Polyglot edition of the Bible. He did not

The University o/Alcald 61

remain a member of the team for very long, however, since he could
not agree with fellow editors on matters of editorial policy. In a
letter tendering his resignation Nebrija explained that he disagreed
with the decision to include Remigius' etymological lexicon of
names, which he did not consider philologically adequate. More im-
portantly, he rejected the practice followed by the team of estab-
lishing the Latin text by collating Latin manuscripts only rather than
correcting them against the original Greek. It had been his under-
standing, Nebrija wrote, that he "was to take part in the correction
of the Latin which is commonly corrupted in all the Latin Bibles, by
comparing it with the Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Greek" {Revista de
Archives, Bibliotecas y Museos 8 [1903], 495). Nebrija's remarks imply
that the team followed (and the Cardinal endorsed) a policy of keep-
ing the language traditions separate, that is, of collating only same-
language manuscripts. The published text of the Complutensian Bible
does not entirely support Nebrija's complaint, as we shall see.

Cisneros also attempted to attract Desiderius Erasmus, the most
renowned biblical humanist north of the Alps. In November 1516
the abbot of Husillos wrote to Cisneros, praising Erasmus' edition of
the New Testament, which had just appeared from the Froben press.
The author, he said, was a good theologian, knowledgeable in Greek
and Hebrew (in the latter he was mistaken), and an elegant Latin
stylist. He suggested that his experience might benefit the editors of
the Complutensian Polyglot: "Given that he has anticipated Your
Reverence with his publication, I believe that he could be of assis-
tance in making your work appear somewhat more polished ... I
believe that Your Reverence should not deprive yourself of a person
like Erasmus. You should avail yourself of his assistance in the cor-
rection of the whole publication and hire his services for a certain
period" (Bataillon, Erasmo, 72, n. 1).

Erasmus mentions an invitation from the Cardinal, but says that
he declined it [Epistolae, ed. Allen, 582:9). Cisneros appears to have
persisted, and in May 1517 Erasmus laconically states the reason for
a second refusal: "The Cardinal of Toledo has invited me again, but
I do not like Spain" (Ep. 598:47-8). In 1527 Juan Vergara refers to
the matter in a letter to Erasmus, recalling that "Cardinal Cisneros,
the founder of the Complutensian university, . . . had the most won-
derful esteem for you and was keen on enjoying your company" (Ep.
1814:459-61). Perhaps Erasmus was wise not to accept the invitation.

62 The University of Alcald

It is likely that his relationship with colleagues on the project would
not have been smooth. We have already mentioned Lopez de Ziini-
ga's criticism of Erasmus' work, which resulted in a prolonged po-
lemic between the two scholars. Nebrija, too, found fault with the
annotations in Erasmus' New Testament edition. Of this, however,
Erasmus did not become aware until after Nebrija's death, when the
imperial secretary Guy Morillon sent him a critical note in Nebrija's
hand. Erasmus was clearly annoyed. "I would have thought Nebrija
was more open-minded ... it is a quarrel over goat's wool," was his
miffed reply (Gilly, El Erasmismo en Espana, 195-218).

Cisneros saw the completion of the work under his direction, but
not its publication. Modern scholars speculate that the editors de-
layed publication because Pope Leo had granted Erasmus' publisher,
Johann Froben, an exclusive privilege for four years. Waiting for the
papal imprimatur, however, had more than legal significance. It
provided the work with much-needed protection against critics of the
enterprise. The application of philology to biblical studies was suffer-
ing from the stigma of heterodoxy. Several factors had contributed to
this perception. First of all, textual criticism of the Bible, which in
turn led to reinterpretations of some passages, was seen as part of a
reform movement which under Luther's leadership was developing
into a schismatic movement. Secondly, edition and translation was
claimed by humanists as their task proper, whereas theologians in-
sisted on the exclusive right to deal with biblical texts. The interfer-
ence of "theologizing humanists", especially their efforts to translate
the Bible into vernacular languages, was considered a violation of the
teaching authority of the church. Thirdly, traditionalists saw any
revision of the biblical text as tampering with the Word of God and
a challenge to the principle of inspiration. Yet, as the medieval tri-
vium gave way to more comprehensive humanistic studies and phi-
lology became a focal point of the curriculum, scholars became
increasingly aware of the fact that the Bible, like other texts, had
been corrupted over time through the negligence of scribes. In Italy
Lorenzo Valla and in northern Europe Erasmus and Lefevre attempt-
ed to rescue the original text, but their textual criticism met with stiff
resistance from more traditional elements in the church. Their work
was seen as an inspirational source of the reformers and thus, in the
eyes of adherents to the old faith, was connected with heterodoxy.

In the preface to the Polyglot, addressed to Pope Leo X, Cisneros

The University ofAlcald 63

therefore justified his enterprise and explained his motives for pro-
ducing the edition:

There are many reasons, Holy Father, that impel us to print the
text of Holy Scripture in the original languages. These are the
principal ones. Words have their own unique character, and no
translation of them, however complete, can entirely express
their full meaning . . . they are laden with a variety of sublime
truths which cannot be understood from any source other than
the original language. Moreover, wherever there is diversity in
the Latin manuscripts or the suspicion of a corrupted reading
(we know how frequently this occurs because of the ignorance
and negligence of copyists), it is necessary to go back to the
original source of Scripture, as St. Jerome and St. Augustine and
other ecclesiastical writers advise us to do, to examine the auth-
enticity of the books of the Old Testament in light of the
original Hebrew text and of the New Testament in light of the
Greek copies. And so that every student of Holy Scripture
might have at hand the original texts themselves and be able to
quench his thirst at the very fountainhead of the water that
flows unto life everlasting and not have to content himself with
rivulets alone, we ordered the original languages of Holy Scrip-
ture with their translations adjoined to be printed. (Olin, Catho-
lic Reformation, 62-3)

Cisneros' dedicatory letter contains a remarkable number of paral-
lels with Erasmus' prolegomena to his New Testament edition. Eras-
mus likewise deplored the negligence of scribes and emphasized the
care and effort involved in obtaining and collating "old and very cor-
rect" manuscripts. He, too, cited Augustine and Jerome for the need
to consult the original texts, "the actual sources, rather than pools
and runnels" to discover the hidden meaning of the divine words
{CWE, Epp. 384, 373). Chronological considerations would suggest
that Cisneros was inspired by Erasmus' words, but there is no need
to postulate a dependence since both men faced the same potential
criticism and were bound to offer similar justifications. Their argu-
ments can, moreover, be traced to the letters and prefaces of Jerome,
who had to defend his philological work against much the same criti-
cism (Rummel, Humanist-Scholastic Debate, 100-102).

Nebrija's letter of resignation implied that Cisneros' team kept

64 The University of Alcald

the language traditions separate. The Cardinal's preface says nothing
about his editorial principles but clearly states that he expected read-
ers to compare the translation with the original. An inspection of the
text shows, moreover, that it was not consistently based on a colla-
tion of same-language manuscripts. Jerry Bentley, who examined the
Polyglot text of the New Testament in some detail, noted that the
Latin Vulgate was occasionally emended on the basis of the Greek
text. More typically, however, the editors chose among the Greek
variants those that agreed with the Latin Vulgate. In one notorious
case, they supplied the Greek for 1 John 5:7 (the "Comma Johan-
neum"), for which they could find no manuscript evidence, by re-
translating the Latin Vulgate. Bentley concluded that "anarchy
reigned over principle in the editing of the Polyglot edition" (Bentley,
Humanists, 107). It should be added, however, that anarchy reigned
in many editions at a time when textual criticism was in its infancy.

The practice of inserting a passage for which there was no manu-
script evidence, for example, strikes the modern scholar as inexcusa-
ble. Yet Erasmus, the most admired textual critic of his time,
resorted to the same practice and nonchalantly observed: "Since I
found at the end of this book [of Revelation] a few words in our
Vulgate which were missing in the Greek manuscripts, I added them
out of the Latin" {Novum Instrumentum [1516], II, 625). His candid
admission implies that he saw nothing wrong with this practice.
Bentley observes that the Polyglot edition did not manifest "careful,
professional editorial scholarship" {BenxlGy, Humanists, 110); Erasmus
has likewise been accused of shoddy editorial practices. Nevertheless
modern scholars agree that the two editions are hallmarks in the
history of biblical scholarship and recognize that the editors cannot
be held to the standards of modern textual criticism. They were
hampered by limited access to manuscripts, by the novelty of the
task, which they learned by doing, and by a culture that regarded
any challenge to tradition as inherently evil. No doubt, biblical hu-
manists had to overcome scruples, in themselves and in their readers,
when their findings contradicted traditional exegesis.

It is for this reason that Cisneros' editors did not consistently
emend the Vulgate and Erasmus refrained from radical changes to the
Latin text in his first edition of the New Testament, commenting: "I
did it sparingly, fearing that some people would not tolerate such
innovation" {Novum Testamentum [1519], B4 recto). Erasmus sought

The University of Alcald 65

to protect his reputation by adding copious annotations explaining
his editorial decisions. They did not produce the intended effect,
however. On the contrary, far from justifying the editor in the eyes
of the readers, the annotations involved Erasmus in a series of
polemics. His work was investigated by the Spanish Inquisition and
formally condemned by the Faculty of Theology at Paris. The edi-
tors of the Polyglot, by contrast, supplied only brief marginal notes,
providing mostly biblical cross-references and defining unusual
words. Only a handful of marginal notes addressed textual problems.
In light of Erasmus' experience, the restraint of the Polyglot editors
appears prudent.

From a commercial point of view the Polyglot was not a success,
but then Cisneros had not looked for material profit, as the executors
of his estate explained. The price was set, "not counting the ex-
penses, which were practically endless, but the benefit derived from
reading the text" {Historical Catalogue, 3). According to estimates
Cisneros had expended some 50,000 gold ducats on printing and
research costs. Of the six hundred sets printed, a considerable num-
ber was lost in a shipwreck; the remainder were sold for six and a
half ducats each. About 150 sets survive today. The rise of humanism
had generated a lively interest in polyglot editions, but the Basel
printer Johann Froben had anticipated the Complutensian Polyglot
with the bilingual edition of the New Testament prepared and anno-
tated by Erasmus. Published in 1516, the Erasmian text had gained a
strong foothold in the market place long before the Polyglot reached
the stage of publication. The Erasmian New Testament retained its
hold on the readership. Unlike the comprehensive Complutensian
Polyglot, it went through five editions between 1516 and 1535, and
proved an eminently "saleable commodity" {CWE, Ep. 1010).

Cisneros and the Politics
of Spain, 1492-1516

V-/isneros' political influence developed with his appointment as the
Queen's confessor and his elevation shortly thereafter to the arch-
bishopric of Toledo, a position that entailed the primacy of Spain.
He was present and no doubt played a role in the negotiations pre-
ceding the marriage alliances between the Spanish Crown and the
Habsburgs which provided for the double union of Margaret and
Philip the Handsome, the children of Emperor Maximilian, with
Juan and Juana, the children of the Catholic Monarchs.

The homeland of the Habsburgs was the Upper Rhine region and
Austria, but the focus of Habsburg politics changed in 1477, when
Maximilian secured the hand of Mary, the heiress of Burgundy. As
regent of Burgundy on his wife's behalf, Maximilian held fiefs from
both the French Crown and the German Empire. On the accidental
death of his wife, their son Philip the Handsome inherited the title
to Burgundy. He was declared of age in 1494 and invested as Duke.
Shortly afterwards the marriage contracts linking the Habsburgs with
the Spanish crown were signed.

In 1496 Cisneros accompanied the Queen to Burgos to make
arrangements for the departure of Princess Juana for Burgundy,
where her marriage to Philip was celebrated on 21 October. In 1497
he performed the marriage ceremony uniting the crown prince Juan
with Margaret of Austria. The same year saw the marriage of another
of the royal princesses, Isabel, to Manuel I of Portugal. Negotiations
also continued for the marriage of Princess Catherine to Arthur,
crown prince of England, and after his death, to his brother Henry
(later Henry VIII).

When Juan, the only son and designated heir of the Monarchs,
died unexpectedly in October 1497 at the age of nineteen, the scale of
the funeral was proportionate to the sense of loss experienced by his
parents. The Burgundian historian Philippe de Commines, who de-

The Politics of Spain 67

voted a chapter in his Memoirs (8.24) to the misfortunes of the
Spanish royal family, commented that he had never heard of such
intense manifestations of public grief. "For forty days all commerce
came to a stop . . . everyone wore coarse black cloth, and the nobility
and men of stature had their mules decked out completely in black
down to their knees — only the eyes were visible — and black ban-
ners covered the doors of houses in the cities." National grief was
also given expression in the famous musical setting of "Triste Espafia
sin Ventura" by Juan del Encina.

The carefully laid plans for the Spanish succession were further
disturbed, when Margaret's pregnancy ended in a stillbirth later that
year. The succession now devolved on Isabel, the oldest daughter of
the Catholic Monarchs, but with her death the following year and
that of her infant son in 1500, the right of succession passed to Juana
and Philip the Handsome. The couple had been residing in Brussels
and Ghent, where Juana had given birth to two daughters, Eleanor
and Isabel, and to a son, Charles. Her husband's philandering and her
own violently jealous reactions had marred the marital peace during
these years, however.

The couple arrived in Spain in January 1502 to formalize their
right of succession. On this occasion, too, Cisneros was in atten-
dance, presiding over their installation in a solemn ceremony at the
cathedral of Toledo and remaining with the royal family during the
following five months, "without however paying much attention to
the court festivities", as Gomez duly notes (Retana, Cisneros, 114).
The pageant with which the couple was received is described in detail
in a panegyric addressed to the Duke by one of his Burgundian sub-
jects, the humanist Desiderius Erasmus: "In the cathedral of Toledo,
which is dedicated to the Virgin, before a congregation formed of the
flower of the Spanish nobility, witnessed by every high dignitary of
the ecclesiastical order, by the grace of God, in the presence of the
king and queen surrounded by a vast crowd of civil officials and
magistrates, you were installed and crowned with solemn ceremony
as ruler of Castile; and allegiance was sworn to you with wonderful
unanimity and an enthusiasm never known before . . . Thus you
filled Spain to overflowing with an accumulation of joy" {CWE 27,
pp. 24-5).

This was the official version; in reality Philip and his Flemish
advisors were highly unpopular. He spoke no Spanish and had no

68 The Politics of Spain

understanding of Spanish tradition, giving offense to many with his
cavalier behaviour. It was, moreover, interpreted as a lack of commit-
ment that he could not be persuaded to remain in Spain, either to
accommodate his pregnant wife whose condition did not allow her
to return to Flanders, or to become better acquainted with the cus-
toms of the people he was to rule. There was also unease about
Philip's relations with France. King Louis XII had given him a
magnificent reception on his journey through France, which included
a ceremonial session with the Paris Parlement, a gesture welcomed
by the francophile Flemish party accompanying the Duke. Such
demonstrations of friendship flew in the face of Spanish sentiments.
In a candid letter to his ambassador in London Ferdinand gave vent
to his anger about Philip's attitude. "I spoke at length with [Philip],
advising him not to leave the country. There were many reasons:
first, in case of my wife's, the Queen's, death, my daughter, the
princess, and he must immediately take peaceful possession of these
realms; secondly ... in spite of the advice and counter to the wishes
expressed by myself and my wife the Queen he departed, travelling
right through the territory of the French King — his and my enemy
— putting himself into his hands." Subsequently Philip joined in an
alliance with France, which was clearly not in the interest of Spain:
"He made the French allies his allies and the French enemies his
enemies, without including or excepting us and our realm, thus put-
ting at risk my rights in Naples and favouring those of the French
king in this treaty of friendship" (Diaz-Plaja, Historia de Espana, 50).
Similarly the English ambassadors in Spain reported in 1506 that "the
people were sorry that [Philip] was so much ruled by the Council of
France" (Bergenroth, Letters and Papers, I #437).

It was on less than cordial terms, then, that Philip departed for
Flanders at the end of February 1503. His wife Juana remained in
Toledo, where she gave birth one month later to a son, Ferdinand.
Cisneros baptized the child and, taking advantage of the fact that the
prince was born in his diocese, obtained from the Queen a tax
exemption for Toledo (Gomez, De rebus gestis, 135).

The Death of Queen Isabel (1504)

In the following year Queen Isabel died at the age of fifty-three.
Although Cisneros was not present at her death in November 1504,
he was one of the executors of the will, which made Juana Queen of

The Politics of Spain 69

Castile and Leon. Cisneros' biographer, Gomez de Castro, notes that
Juana's husband was all but excluded from power, "whether the
Queen [Isabel] harboured hostile feelings on account of his unworthy
treatment of her daughter or because she really thought that he was
ill prepared to govern Spain" (Gomez, De rebus gestis, 153). In her
will Isabel merely noted that obedience was owed to Philip by
Juana's subjects "as her husband" (Diaz-Plaja, Historia de Espana,
40). However, she also acknowledged the need for contingency plans,
taking into consideration Juana's mental imbalance. In case she
proved incapable of exercising government, the will provided that
Ferdinand was to assume the regency until his oldest grandson (Char-
les, then four years old) had reached the age of twenty. The Queen
carefully noted that she had taken the advice of the cortes as well as
of "some prelates and grandees of my kingdom" and that "all had
been in agreement" on this point (ibid.). The provisions of Isabel's
will were promulgated at the cortes of Toro in March 1505 and
confirmed at Salamanca in November of that year. Philip, however,
did not accept the passive role envisaged for him, and the interpre-
tation of the will became the subject of prolonged and tenacious
negotiations with his father-in-law.

Philip's bid for power was supported by Castilian nobles who
were willing to intrigue on his behalf against the "old Catalan", as
the unpopular Ferdinand was dubbed. In the words of Pietro Martire
"the nobles grunt and sharpen their teeth like wild boars with the
desire and hope of a great change" (Ep. 277). Similarly, the English
ambassadors in Spain reported to their king, Henry VII, that factions
existed and "there is fear of troubles ensuing". At the same time they
noted that Ferdinand's position in Aragon was secure and that he
was de facto in control of Castile: "All the nobles and commons [in
Aragon] are very obedient, loving him for the good justice he minis-
ters to them . . . Immediately on his Queen's decease he had pro-
claimed himself Governor and Administrator of Castile on behalf of
his daughter, . . . and received all the revenues for his own use"
(Bergenroth, Letters and Papers^ I #437, July 1505). Ferdinand had,
moreover, scored a diplomatic victory by concluding peace with
France (Blois, October 1505) and marrying Germaine de Foix, niece
of the French King Louis XII (cf. Diaz-Plaja, Historia de Espana^ 50-
1). The marriage contract provided that the crown of Aragon would
pass to the heirs of Germaine and Ferdinand, and that parts of

70 The Politics of Spain

Naples should be handed over to Germaine and were to revert to
France if she died childless. Ferdinand explained the diplomatic im-
port of his actions: "The Archduke, my son, . . . has made demon-
strations of desiring to come to Spain with an army and a fleet. I,
therefore, seeing that he had made a league with the King of France
so greatly to my prejudice, and in order that no inconvenience might
ensue to me from the said league, also that I might the better provide
for the preservation of these kingdoms, and of my honour and my
rights, have agreed to a treaty of peace and amity and brotherhood
with the King of France for the preservation of our realms ... I have
now sent to beg and request [Philip] to study and determine who is
entitled to rule these kingdoms, in order that peace may not be dis-
turbed. For though the government of them belongs to me, and they
have sworn fealty and obedience to me, and are at peace, yet he pre-
tends that the said government belongs to him" (Bergenroth, Letters
and Papers, I #450, December 1505).

A compromise was eventually reached and a treaty signed at Sala-
manca (26 December 1505), which provided for a tripartite govern-
ment of Castile, dividing authority between Juana, Philip, and Ferdi-
nand. Documents were to be signed "Don Fernando, Don Felipe,
Dona Juana, by the grace of God Kings and princes of Castile, Leon,
Aragon, the two Sicilies, Jerusalem, Granada, etc., Archdukes of
Austria, Dukes of Burgundy". The signatories were to be referred to
as "Their Highnesses," a title until then reserved for Queen Juana
(Diaz-Plaja, Historia de Espana, 52-3).

A second round of negotiations took place in the spring of 1506,
however, after Philip's arrival in Spain with an army of three thous-
and Flemish and German soldiers. During these negotiations, Cisne-
ros acted as Ferdinand's liaison. He had advised Ferdinand to rely on
military force in turn (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 150), but the King's
weak position in Castile obliged him to negotiate. On 2 June Ferdi-
nand sent Cisneros to a meeting with Philip, giving the Archbishop
plenary powers to act on his behalf and, as the document stated, "to
sign in my name and in my absence any agreement with the Most
Serene King Philip, my very dear and dearly beloved son, in all mat-
ters necessary for the true and perpetual union and concord between
him and myself." He declared his desire to remove any reason for
distrust, "for they say, among other things, that the said Most Serene
King, my son, fears that I shall conspire against him with the Most

The Politics of Spain 71

Serene Queen, my daughter, his wife". He protested that he had "no
desire to act against him or to his prejudice, but rather to collaborate
with them [Philip and Juana] in love and peace and agreement"
(Diaz-Plaja, Historia de Espana, 55-6).

There was, however, little room for maneuvering since Philip en-
joyed the support of a great part of the Castilian nobility. Ferdinand
was therefore obliged on 28 June 1506 to sign the agreement of
Villafafila, handing over the government of Castile to his "beloved
children" and promising to retire to Aragon. In the agreement he
emphasized that he was relinquishing his power voluntarily to avoid
war and dissension, because he "wished to put peace and the com-
mon weal of the kingdom before his private interest" (ibid., 57). The
document also contained a mutual defense pact between Philip and
Ferdinand. According to Cisneros' biographer Gomez de Castro, the
archbishop was apologetic about his inability to bring about a set-
tlement more favourable to Ferdinand. In a letter to the regent, he
said "that although the agreement was not to be despised, it did not
satisfy him, but since he could not obtain more, he accepted the
conditions which weren't all that bad" (Gomez, De rebus gestis, 170).
Ferdinand himself protested that the treaty was prejudicial to him,
but acknowledged that he was forced to accept the conditions be-
cause Philip had "assembled the grandees [of Castile] and united a
powerful and strong army, so that my royal person is in notorious
and manifest danger . . . thus from fear and apprehension of what has
been stated and, . . . since the said King, my son-in-law, is determined
entirely to usurp, as in fact he does, the administration of these king-
doms, despoiling me of the administration which on many accounts
belongs to me by right ... I am obliged to sign" (Bergenroth, Letters
and Papers, II, 1509-1525, #12, 27 June 1506).

Letters to his ambassadors in England and Venice project the
image Ferdinand wanted to present to the world: the unselfish and
loving father, who was doing everything to foster peace and whose
intentions were misinterpreted or misrepresented by a grasping son-
in-law. To the English court he wrote: "Having found that the peace
and tranquillity of these kingdoms could not otherwise be suffi-
ciently provided for, I have entered into a treaty with the Archduke
[Philip]. For I always desire the welfare of my children on account of
the love I bear them" (Bergenroth, Letters and Papers, I, #471, sum-
mer 1506). To his ambassador in Venice he wrote in a similar vein.

72 The Politics of Spain

He had always cherished fatherly feelings toward Philip, but "ene-
mies whispered into Juana's ears that he intended to retain for him-
self the royal prerogatives of the crown of Castile." He noted that he
was in fact "entitled to do so by the will of the late Queen, but
never had the desire to make use of that right during the lifetime of
Philip and Juana." He complained, moreover, that Philip had acted
like an enemy. On his arrival in Spain, "instead of hastening to see
their father, they sent messengers to him and asked him to appoint
a formal meeting . . . Philip even thought it proper to come to the
meeting with an armed guard" (Bergenroth, Letters and Papers, I,
#470, 1 July 1506). English documents meanwhile tell a different
story, showing Ferdinand intriguing against Philip and encouraging
French support for the rebellious Duke of Guelders in the hope that
his operations in Burgundy would oblige Philip to leave Spain and
return home (ibid., #477, July 1506).

In the event, Ferdinand did not retire to Aragon, as he had
announced, but instead departed for Naples, to secure his position
there. The kingdom had been conquered in 1443 by Ferdinand's
uncle, Alfonso I, who became joint ruler of Naples and Sicily. After
his death in 1458, Sicily passed into the hands of Ferdinand's father
and subsequently to himself. Naples, which was claimed by France,
was retained, after a long struggle, by Ferrante, Alfonso's illegitimate
son and Ferdinand's brother-in-law. He repeatedly received military
aid from Ferdinand, who maintained the alliance in his own interest,
for the protection of Sicily. After Ferrante's death, the French king
Charles Vm revived claims to the kingdom. He invaded Italy in 1494
and briefly occupied Naples, which was, however, recovered by Ferran-
tino, Ferrante's grandson, with the help of the Spanish Gran Capitan
Gonzalo de Cordoba. Ferrantino enjoyed his victory only briefly, dy-
ing unexpectedly in 1496 and leaving the kingdom in the hands of his
uncle Frederick. In these circumstances both France and Spain pressed
their respective claims and found it convenient to unite their forces.
They jointly invaded Naples and partitioned it in 1501. Very soon,
however, a dispute arose between Ferdinand and Charles' successor,
Louis XII. Spanish troops drove out the French and made Ferdinand
the sole ruler of Naples in 1504. Subsequently it was governed by
viceroys appointed by the Spanish Crown. The terms of Ferdinand's
marriage contract with Germaine de Foix, which allowed for a hypo-
thetical reversal of Naples to France, represented a rapprochement.

The Politics of Spain 73

On arrival in Naples in 1506, Ferdinand's first act was to relieve
the viceroy, Gonzalo de Cordoba, whose loyalty he suspected, and
take over the reins of government himself. Fortune then took a rapid
turn in his favour: Philip fell ill and died in September 1506, leaving
a power vacuum.

Cisneros' First Regency (1506/7)

Already during the last days of Philip's illness, Cisneros' house
became a meeting place for power brokers. After Philip's death a has-
tily formed interim council, presided over by Cisneros, proposed
recalling Ferdinand but also expressed fear of his resentment. Accord-
ing to Gomez, Pimentel, Senor de Benavente, voiced his concern:
"Are you not aware that, remembering the recent confrontation, he
will treat all of us with insolence? And being a master of dissimulat-
ing his innermost feelings, he will be full of benevolence on the
outside and smile sweetly at first and will punish us severely later?"
(Gomez, De rebus gestis, 185) The chronicler Pero Mexia reports that
among the alternatives discussed was the suggestion that "the
kingdom be governed by the council in the name of Juana" (Mexia,
Cronica, 41). Others advanced the idea that the Emperor Maximilian
be approached and made regent on behalf of his grandson Charles.
Cisneros, however, spoke against calling in a stranger and reminded
them that Ferdinand was an experienced and competent ruler.

The hectic nature of the negotiations in the days following
Philip's death is illustrated by an anecdote related by Cisneros' bio-
grapher, Juan Vallejo. After an interminable meeting, the archbishop
ordered dinner to be served, but was reminded by his valet that it
was now past midnight and by eating at this time he would be in
technical violation of the church law requiring abstinence from food
before morning mass. According to Vallejo, the archbishop demon-
strated his quick mind and diplomatic skills by insisting: "Have
dinner served. It cannot possibly be more than eleven o'clock." No
one contradicted the archbishop.

Cisneros' proposal to recall Ferdinand was accepted by the coun-
cil in the end. He was formally appointed guardian of the Queen and
representative of crown prince Charles' interests until Ferdinand's
return. The Queen had formally been asked her opinion, but after
Philip's death she had abandoned herself to grief and was unwilling
or unable to make political decisions. The disconcerting behaviour of

74 The Politics of Spain

the widow is reported in some detail by Pietro Martire. The Queen,
seeking solace in a convent at Tordesillas, wished to take her hus-
band's corpse with her.

The Archbishop of Burgos met with her and explained to the
Queen that this was forbidden . . . She had a fit of anger and
obstinately persisted in her wish. She ordered her servants to
open the grave and take out the coffin. None of the nobles or
prelates could make her desist from her purpose. All were of
the opinion that one must not put pressure on her for fear that
another fit of anger might cause her to abort the fetus she was
carrying in her uterus. Thus they disinterred the corpse of her
husband on December 20. We saw it placed into a container of
lead, covered with another of wood, in the presence of all the
ambassadors. . . . We made the journey with the corpse being
transported in a carriage and four, escorting the coffin, covered
with a royal cloth of silk and gold. We stopped in Torquemada
. . . armed soldiers guarded the corpse in the parish church, as if
enemies were on the point of assaulting the walls. Women were
strictly forbidden to enter. She was plagued by the same jeal-
ousy as during her husband's lifetime.

The following day the company proceeded toward the village of
Hornillos. On the way they encountered a convent.

Thinking that it was the house of friars, the Queen ordered sud-
denly to halt the cortege and lower the coffin to the ground in
open country. But when she realized that it was a women's con-
vent, she immediately gave orders to transport the coffin else-
where. On the open road, at night, she commanded that the
bearers take the corpse out of the coffin by the uncertain light
of torches, which could barely be kept ablaze because of a
strong wind. Some carpenters, fetched for this purpose, opened
the wooden and lead containers. After contemplating the corpse
of her husband and calling on the nobles as witnesses, she or-
dered them to close it anew and transport it to Hornillos on
their shoulders, (quoted Diaz Plaja, Historia de Espana, 60)

The monastery at Tordesillas became the final resting place for
the corpse, and Juana remained there in a state of deep melancholy
until her own death in 1555.

The Politics of Spain 75

The bizarre behaviour of the disturbed Queen on this and other
occasions soon made clear that Ferdinand's plans for her future,
which included remarriage, were unrealistic. As soon as she was
widowed, the English king, Henry VII, showed interest in a dynastic
union. According to a letter from Ferdinand to his councillor and
secretary, Miguel Perez Almazan, the English did not mind her de-
rangement "as long as it did not prevent her from bearing children"
(Bergenroth, Letters and Papers, Vol. 1, #511, April 1507). Ferdinand
warned Henry, however, that the subject must be broached to her by
none but himself. Only he knew how to handle her. At one point
Henry suggested to use the services of Cisneros and asked his
daugher-in-law, Catherine, to write a letter to this effect. She had a
direct interest in the affair, since her marriage to the English crown
prince was held up by Ferdinand's reluctance to pay the remainder
of her dowry. If the marriage between Juana and the king could be
brought about, he was willing to make concessions regarding her
dowry. Catherine, however, was uncertain about taking the initiative
in such a delicate matter and asked her father for further directions
(ibid., #541, 7 Sept 1507). Henry also held out hopes of financing an
expedition against Africa jointly with Ferdinand and the King of Por-
tugal, once the marriage to Juana was concluded (ibid., #552, October
1507). On his return to Spain, Ferdinand did in fact broach the sub-
ject to Juana. He reported to his ambassador at the English court that
her mental state was still precarious, that she assured him of her filial
devotion but asked him not to force her into a new marriage. He de-
sisted from importuning her further because he was convinced his
efforts would be in vain. It is unclear to what extent, if any, Cisneros
was personally involved in attempts to obtain the Queen's agree-
ment. Shortly afterwards the English king refocused his marriage
plans on Juan's widow, Margaret, with a similar lack of success.

To return to the year 1506: the unpredictability of the Queen and
her unwillingness to involve herself in matters of government created
considerable difficulties for Cisneros. His executive power rested on
uncertain legal grounds, and insurrection was a distinct danger. An
accord signed on October 1 by the archbishop and council members
reflects their fear of civil war. They agreed to refrain from the fol-
lowing actions: interference with the established norms of adminis-
tration; the recruiting of military forces; efforts to gain power over
the persons of Juana or her son Ferdinand. They furthermore agreed

76 The Politics of Spain

to abide by majority decisions made by the council. Cisneros had
been delegated to write to Ferdinand asking him to return and once
more take over the regency of the country until Charles, the heir to
the throne, would come of age. According to Vallejo, he asked Ferdi-
nand "not to think of the past and of the passions of the nobility,
but putting all aside, to come as quickly as possible and take over the
government like a true Lord and Father . . . for there was no other,
besides God, to remedy this great loss and misfortune" (resume of
letter in Gomez, De rehus gestis, 188-9). It appears that Cisneros had
hoped to obtain plenipotentiary powers from Juana for himself. A
document to this effect was drawn up (Garcia Oro, Cisneros, 160, n.
16), but remained unsigned.

While Ferdinand attended to his affairs in Naples, Spain sank into
civil war and was convulsed by rebellion. The Duke of Medina Sido-
nia attempted to regain Gibraltar, which had been taken from him
by the Crown in 1502; the Count of Lemos, similarly deprived,
briefly retook Ponferrada in Galicia; feuds broke out in Segovia, To-
ledo, and Madrid. In Granada the soldiers mutinied, and in Cordoba
the prisoners of the Inquisition were released. An outbreak of the
plague added to the chaos. Pietro Martire predicted that "everything
will collapse" (Ep. 354).

After Ferdinand's return to Spain in August 1507, order was re-
stored, as he reported with great satisfaction to his daughter Cather-
ine: "They told me . . . that my arrival was necessary for the welfare
and restoration of the Most Serene Queen my dearly beloved daugh-
ter and your dear sister, and for the good of this realm, which, before
my arrival, was without order and in great upheaval and tumult"
(Diaz-Plaja, Historia de Espana, 62). The cortes officially delegated
authority to Ferdinand. He in turn brought with him from Italy pa-
pal briefs making Cisneros a cardinal and naming him Inquisitor
General of Spain.

Spain under Ferdinand, 1507-1516

The following years saw the expedition to Oran, which has al-
ready been discussed in the context of Cisneros' missionary efforts.
The Cardinal retained his position of authority at court and re-
peatedly acted as Ferdinand's representative during periods of ab-
sence: in 1510, when Ferdinand attended the cortes of Aragon, he left
Cisneros in charge of his daughter and grandson Ferdinand; in 1511

The Politics of Spain 77

and 1512 he called for his presence to discuss diplomatic negotiations
and military preparations in connection with the Holy League con-
cluded between Spain, England, the Empire, and the Pope against
France. The year 1512 also saw the invasion and annexation of Navarre.

The Conquest of Navarre

Navarre, wedged between France and Aragon, had once been the
possession of Ferdinand's father, John II of Aragon, through his
marriage with Blanche, Queen of Navarre. On his death it passed
through his daughter first to the family of Foix and, when that line
had no male issue, to the family of Albret. However, in a series of
treaties between 1476 and 1500 Navarre became effectively a Spanish
protectorate and thus was destined to be annexed. The final steps in
that direction were taken in July 1512, when Ferdinand used the
rivalry between the Foix and Albret families to put in a claim on
behalf of his wife, Germaine de Foix. Alleging that there existed a
secret French plan to invade Aragon through Navarre, he ventured
a pre-emptive strike in July 1512. He was aided by both the English
king and the pope. Henry VII was persuaded to send an army to
Guienne to recover ancient English possessions, thus preventing
France from coming to the aid of Navarre. Pope Julius II, allied with
Ferdinand in the Holy League, excommunicated the Navarrese King,
Jean d'Albret, because he had supported the schismatic Council of
Pisa. Within a few months Navarre was conquered by Spanish troops
under the command of the Duke of Alba and annexed to Aragon.
This arrangement was changed in 1515, when Navarre was incorpo-
rated in Castile, while retaining a certain amount of autonomy in its
administration and coinage.

According to Gomez, Cisneros' presence at the deliberations lead-
ing up to the conquest lent legitimacy to the proceedings: "In August
he once again was at the side of the king, who was in Logroiio,
occupied with the problems of Navarre. His interest in what is good
and just was always so strong, his consideration for religion so great,
that by the mere presence of such a man the war could seem just"
[De rebus gestis, 354). Cisneros' exact role or involvement in Ferdi-
nand's plans are, however, difficult to assess.

The military and diplomatic success in Navarre did not suffice to
improve Ferdinand's relations with the Castilian nobility. They con-
tinued to intrigue against him. The malcontents found receptive ears

78 The Politics of Spain

at the Burgundian court. Ferdinand's position in Castile was there-
fore still precarious when he died in January 1516. For some time he
had wrestled with the question of succession. Personally he inclined
toward his younger grandson and namesake Ferdinand, with whom
he had a closer relationship than with Charles who was brought up
in Burgundy. In the end, however, he made Charles the heir. Gomez
second-guessed his motives: "He was easily persuaded not to put
Ferdinand in charge of the kingdom because he was convinced that
Charles, educated in the Belgian tradition, would never come to
Spain" (De rebus gestis, 370),

The Second Regency,
1316-1517

1 he immediate problem confronting the advisors assembled at
Ferdinand's deathbed was the appointment of a regent. Ferdinand's
natural son, Alonso, Archbishop of Zaragoza, was to assume that
function in Aragon. With regard to Castile, however, "the choice
was difficult and critical," Gomez writes.

It was not recommendable to name one of the nobles on ac-
count of their old established and deep rivalries, nor someone of
modest situation and fortune, for it was a characteristic of the
Spaniards not to accept as ruler anyone who was not a grandee.
It was difficult, moreover, for a man accustomed to deal with
small matters to speedily grow into his new role and be equal to
such an important task. . . . [When Cisneros' name was put
forward], the King turned his head in a manner that indicated
his misgivings and gave them to understand that the proposal
did not please him. And his words confirmed his thoughts. "Do
you not know Cisneros' character?" [he asked]. "He is not
equal to dealing with men of such diverse conditions," But
when he noticed that all remained silent at his question, he
changed, it seems, as if by divine inspiration, and said: "If I
could design for myself a man equal to the task, I would prefer
Cisneros to be more manageable and reasonable. Customs have
changed for the worse; to demand that men conform with the
old rigorous standards of honour, which Cisneros himself up-
holds, will cause great problems in the realm. On the other
hand I am inclined to accept your proposal because I know his
integrity, his spirit, and his mind which is always desirous of
that which is right and just; I also know that he is not related to
any nobleman and will not be constrained by private causes and
friendships. Moreover, the favours granted him by Isabel and
myself have put him under an obligation and made him our

80 The Second Regency

partisan. Or, to put it another way, he is much obliged to us, of
which he has given clear proof in many instances." Those pres-
ent applauded the king's words and thanked him for choosing
Cisneros. (Gomez, De rebus gestis, 371-2)

Ferdinand's will accordingly named as his successor Charles, who
was "to govern and administrate the realm on behalf of the Most
Serene Queen, the Lady Juana, his mother and our most dear and
beloved daughter." Cisneros was appointed regent of Castile in the
absence of Charles, so "that the said Cardinal might do what we
would do or have the authority or obligation to do, until Charles
decides on a course of action, . , . trusting in his conscience, religion,
rectitude and good will" (will, quoted Retana, Cisneros, 2:20-1).
Ferdinand died on 23 January 1516 in Madrigalejo near Guadalupe,
at an inn where he had taken lodging. When the Royal Council
communicated the provisions of the will to Charles' representative,
Adrian of Utrecht, the clause "until Prince Charles decides on a
course of action" was suppressed. The cardinal's regency was to re-
main in place until Charles could come to Spain in person.

Charles had grown up at the court of his aunt Margaret, Regent
of the Netherlands. When his parents, Philip and Juana, departed for
Spain in 1506, to claim Juana's inheritance, they left the six-year old
Charles and his sisters Eleanor, Mary, and Isabel in the care of Phil-
ip's sister, Margaret. She conducted affairs from her castle in Meche-
len near Brussels, where the royal offspring received a careful educa-
tion and were groomed for their future tasks. Each of the children
was destined to play a role in the politics of Europe: Charles was to
inherit the realms of his grandparents and succeed Maximilian as
emperor; Eleanor was to become Queen of Portugal and, through
her second marriage, of France; Mary and Isabel were to become
Queens of Hungary and Denmark respectively. The siblings were
brought up in the Burgundian tradition. By contrast, the two young-
est children, Ferdinand and Catherine, were born and raised in Spain.

At the time of King Ferdinand's death, Cisneros was at Alcala. A
letter from the royal secretary, Juan Ruiz de Calcena, informed him
of his appointment as regent. The letter requested that he take the
reins of government as soon as possible. Ferdinand had appointed the
Cardinal (and the secretary emphasized: "him alone") because he had
confidence in his upright character and his ability to maintain peace
and order in the realm. The Cardinal's firm hand was now necessary,

The Second Regency 81

he said, "because so far there is uncertainty everywhere whom to
obey and follow. And the Infante [Ferdinand] is here and also the
Queen of Aragon [Germaine de Foix], who are unable to decide
where to go and by what means. There are also the delegates and am-
bassadors; and precautions have to be taken with respect to Navarre
and other parts, where problems will arise in your absence, for in
truth there is no one to give instructions, and everyone speaks in his
own interest" (Cart. Sec. 250).

The misgivings Ferdinand had expressed on his deathbed about
Cisneros' social status were not without foundation. It proved diffi-
cult for Cisneros to hold his own against the nobility, as Gomez tells
us: "Just as the power of the Spanish nobility often threatened the
monarchs, so Cisneros had to make a determined effort to represent
the majesty of the office he held and get the better of the pride and
arrogance of our nobles. And a man who had no noble lineage and
was not supported by numerous and illustrious members of a noble
family, could not do so without displaying the greatest prudence,
supreme courage, and an extraordinary greatness of mind" {De rebus
gestis, 377). Indeed Cisneros' stature as a self-made man was pointed
out and his authority called into question by the Condestable Inigo
de Velasco. The words attributed to him by Gomez characterize the
attitude of the Castilian nobility. "The nobles had suffered enough
slavery during Ferdinand's lifetime," the Condestable reportedly said.
It was intolerable to take orders now from a "monk in a cowl" and
a homo novus {De rebus gestis, 395). This sentiment is confirmed by
Pietro Martire, who observed: "Spain does not like to obey those
who are not Kings." Cisneros' rule was suffered with impatience. In
Martire's view his mission was "to build and to be a patron of letters
rather than to command" (Ep. 573).

In the event, however, Cisneros was able to come to terms with
the most powerful nobles, among them the Condestable who
represented the Velasco family, the Duque del Infantado who was the
head of the Mendozas, and the Almirante who was the spokesman of
the Enriquez family. In March 1516 Alonso Manrique, then resident
at the Burgundian court, wrote admiringly of the Cardinal's shrewd
maneuvers after Ferdinand's death: "He worked wonders: he made
provisions to safeguard the borders and looked after external affairs
and planned for all contingencies and furthermore allied himself with
the grandees. Of this everyone here is informed" (Cart. Sec. 264).

82 The Second Regency

The Cardinal's secretary, Jorge Varacaldo, confirmed in December
1516 that Cisneros had found a modus vivendi and a "great league
and brotherhood with many assurances had been formed with the
Cardinal" (Cart. Sec. 71-2).

Cisneros' liaison at the Burgundian court in the months following
Ferdinand's death was Alonso Manrique de Lara, Bishop of Badajoz
and later of Cordoba. Manrique's political fortunes were on the rise.
Active on Prince Philip's behalf in the power struggle with Ferdi-
nand, he was obliged to leave Spain for Burgundy, where he was
rewarded for his efforts with a seat on the Council of Flanders. At
the time of Ferdinand's death, he was Charles' chaplain. In March
1516 he wrote a confidential report to Cisneros concerning the situ-
ation at Charles' court. He advised the Cardinal to send a personal
representative to Brussels, preferably "a jurist, old, prudent, experi-
enced, and conscientious." The man sent by Cisneros was Diego
Lopez de Ayala, whose subsequent despatches paint a lively picture
of the negotiations and intrigues that characterized the period be-
tween Ferdinand's death in 1516 and Charles' arrival in Spain the
following year. Ayala was well connected. He belonged to the old
Castilian aristocracy. His cousin Pedro Lopez de Ayala was the third
Conde de Fuensalida; another cousin held the post of ambassador at
the English court. Little is known of Diego Ayala's life other than
that he was a canon of Toledo and had translated a number of Italian
authors (among them, Boccaccio) into Spanish. In 1508 he became
Cisneros' Provisioner and Vicar general, that is, his chief administra-
tor and right-hand man in Toledo, and looked after affairs in the
Cardinal's absence. Unlike others at the court of Brussels, he made
no effort to benefit personally from his new appointment. Indeed he
wanted to set an example in what he saw as a mercenary court. His
integrity was recognized by Cisneros, who praised him as a man of
principles in a letter to Charles: "Be assured that he is a person of
great nobility and comes from a long line of gentlemen, so that all
his actions and words are straightforward" (Cart. Xim. 217).

Both of Cisneros' correspondents at the court of Brussels reported
in some detail on the personal characteristics of the heir to the
throne. Manrique described Charles as a talented young man "with
good inclinations and natural greatness". Unfortunately, he wrote,
"he speaks not a word of Spanish, and if he understands anything, it
is very little. . . . He is very much controlled [by others], and does

The Second Regency 83

and says nothing that is not suggested and told to him. He very
much follows his council and is subject to it. We could wish that he
would speak up and take charge in some form and would not leave
his council to speak and act for him. After all he is almost 17 years
old" (Cart. Sec, March 1516, pp. 254-5). In his letter Manrique also
pointed out the principal powers at court: Jean Le Sauvage and
Guillaume de Croy, Lord of Chievres. Le Sauvage had made a stellar
political career. He was appointed councillor in 1490, became Chan-
cellor of Brabant in 1509, and Grand Chancellor of Burgundy in
1515. On Ferdinand's death he was appointed Chancellor of Castile
in absentia. Guillaume de Croy, later Marquis of Aarschot, had been
made Charles' chamberlain and mentor in 1509 and was the chief
policy-maker after Charles had been declared of age in 1515. In his
letter, Manrique noted that Chievres was "a native Frenchman on
both his father's and mother's side, ... he is much beholden to the
King of France and writes to him often, saluting him as 'Your
humble servant and vassal' " (Cart. Sec. 258). Chievres was at the
time involved in negotiations leading up to the Treaty of Noyon
(1517) and was indeed the chief architect of the peace between France
and Burgundy, securing the duchy's borders in preparation for Char-
les' departure for Spain. Chievres' francophile policy was no doubt
a matter of Realpolitik. Charles could not safely depart for Spain
until the treaty with France was concluded. Manrique furthermore
warned Cisneros that the Flemish court was controlled by money:
"Greed rules among the people here, in all social classes, for however
religious they are, greed is not considered a sin or an evil . . . every-
thing is bought and sold" (Cart. Sec. 255-6).

Charles' liaison with Cisneros was Adrian of Utrecht, the future
Pope Adrian VI, Adrian, a theologian at the University of Louvain,
had become Charles' tutor in 1507 and a member of his council in
1512. In October 1515 he had been sent to Spain to secure Ferdi-
nand's agreement to Charles' succession. Martire describes his deli-
cate negotiations with Ferdinand in some detail. The King had a
personal bias in favour of his younger grandson, Ferdinand, but
Adrian drew an attractive picture of Prince Charles as entirely de-
voted to his grandfather and obedient to his wishes. He prudently
agreed to all conditions set by Ferdinand, knowing that they could
be disregarded with impunity after his death.

For Cisneros the continued presence of Adrian in Spain was

84 The Second Regency

awkward. It presented a certain challenge to his authority as regent.
The Cardinal rested his authority on the legal argument that Isabel
had made Ferdinand regent until Charles reached the age of twenty,
and Ferdinand had appointed Cisneros his successor. "And above all,
according to the laws of Spain and the customs of our forefathers, no
foreigner — and Adrian was a Belgian — could be appointed"
(Gomez, De rebus gestis, 379). He cooperated to a certain extent with
Adrian, but according to one contemporary source the ambassador
complained that he was de facto shut out from making decisions,
"that he could do nothing, because the Cardinal was doing every-
thing and did not let him share equitably in the task of governing"
(Retana, Cisneros, 39). Ayala (Cart. Sec. 204-5) commented on the
tug of war in January 1516. He advised Cisneros to keep control of
the situation by lodging Adrian in his own palace and treating him
with such marked honour that no one could allege that he was keep-
ing him under surveillance. Indeed, letters from Charles to Cisneros
indicate that Adrian was made Bishop of Tortosa and Inquisitor of
Aragon on the Cardinal's request (Bergenroth, Letters and Papers,
#23). It is significant, moreover, that Charles' letter ratifying Cis-
neros' position as regent refers to Adrian merely as his "ambassador"
(Diaz-Plaja, Historia de Espana, 97).

Cisneros' authority as regent had been confirmed by Charles in a
letter of 14 February 1516, in which he was given an exclusive man-
date "to govern and administer justice in the Kingdom of Castile" in
Charles' absence and asked to advise and counsel the heir to the
throne, which counsel he promised to respect "as if I had received it
from my father, for I see your good intentions and holy zeal in
God's service and in ours, and for the universal good, justice and
peace in our realms, and for all of Christendom" (Diaz-Plaja, Histo-
ria de Espana, 97). But Cisneros felt that he needed a more specific
document giving him power to constitute tribunals, appoint corregi-
dores and members of the Royal Council, and establish fiscal control.
Accordingly, he directed Ayala, his agent at the Flemish court, to
obtain from Charles plenary powers that would enable him to main-
tain peace and order: "Request from his Highness, now the King, to
send me plenary power for the time until His Highness comes to
these territories," he wrote on 3 April 1516 (Cart. Xim. 102). "And
this power should cover all matters concerning the administration of
justice and finance, and the authority, when necessary, to dismiss

The Second Regency 85

those holding office, whatever the office be, and replace them with
others. Although this power will be used only when necessary and to
keep up the pressure, it is important that this power be far-reaching
and come by the first mail, for there are always arguments about
authority." He was careful to avoid any semblance of personal ambi-
tion: "God knows, I have hesitated a great deal and for a long time
to request this power. I hate nothing so much as making requests
that smack of ambition, but it is required in the service of God and
of His Highness and in the interest of peace in these realms."

The desired reply to Cisneros' request for plenipotentiary powers
was given by Charles in a missive of 4 June 1516: "I send you the
power to govern; it was not done earlier because it seemed that the
previous provision was sufficient; considering your person, dignity,
knowledge, spirit, prudence, and life, any power I give you is small.
I entrust and recommend to your care the state and conscience of my
lady the Queen and of myself, our honour, justice, peace, and the
kingdom" (Retana, Cisneros, 104).

Queen Juana and the Royal Title

In spite of the censored version of Ferdinand's will and its impli-
cation that Charles was not to come into his grandparents' heritage
until a future date, the young prince almost immediately claimed for
himself the title of "King", disregarding the protests of the Royal
Council that this was inappropriate during his mother's lifetime.
They despatched a letter to Charles, remonstrating with him: "In our
opinion Your Highness should not take this step. It is not in accor-
dance with divine or secular law. Your Highness is in peaceful pos-
session of this kingdom; no one denies that it is yours to govern
henceforth as you please and give orders high and low, so that there
is no need to use the title of King during the lifetime of our lady, the
Queen" (Retana, Cisneros, 92-3). This opinion is also reflected in a
letter from Martire to Marliano, one of Charles' privy councillors:
"He is of course the heir. Everyone admits that. But they say it is
not customary to give the title of King to anyone while the holder of
that title is still alive . . . You will say, but he governs on behalf of his
mother, who is ill. This, too, the people grant, but they say he may
do so with the legitimate title of Prince. To avoid unpopularity
[Ferdinand] relinquished the title of King of Castile on the death of
his wife, since it was not his by right. You would make the young

86 The Second Regency

man unpopular if you, who are entrusted with his education, would
act in this manner. . . . [The Aragonese] say they will deny authoriza-
tion, if it is requested from them" (Ep. 568). It appears, however,
that Charles was fond of the royal title and was not discouraged by
his advisors from usurping it. The Bishop of Badajoz reported to Cis-
neros: "He smiles and is pleased when they call him King. It's the
same with the title Emperor. He puts 'King of the Romans' in his
letters and signs in this fashion, but everyone calls him and writes to
him by the title 'Emperor' " (Cart. Sec. 264). In the end the Council
under Cisneros acquiesced and issued the necessary proclamation.
There was no adverse reaction from the people, as had been feared.
Cisneros reported to Diego Lopez de Ayala, his deputee at the Flem-
ish court, that the proclamation on 12 April 1516 was duly cele-
brated in Toledo and Madrid and greeted with shouts (unprompted,
Cisneros insisted) of "Castile, Castile! For the Queen and King Char-
les, our lords" (Cart. Xim. 109).

In the meantime, Queen Juana's condition had worsened. She
refused to leave her room, insisted on sleeping on the floor rather
than in her bed, rejected warm clothes to protect her against the
cold, and let "her dinner rot, so that there was a repugnant smell
about" (Gomez, De rebus gestis, 429). The only company she appre-
ciated was that of her cats, who did not return her affection. Her face
was reportedly disfigured with scratches. The Queen had been for
some years in the care of the corregidor of Toledo, Mosen Luis
Ferrer. Cisneros now recommended to Charles that he be removed
from the post. Ferrer protested the dismissal. In his letter to Cisneros
he confirmed that the Queen had been ill treated, but declined re-
sponsibility. He had merely been following orders. His enemies had
maligned him, saying that it was his fault "that the Queen our Lady
was not restored to health, and that she had been a prisoner while
the King her father lived ... I see from Your Lordship's orders, you
believe their tales, and think that I am as they depict me. Your
Lordship has amidst your great occupations forgotten to consider
that so wise a King and one whom Your Lordship knew and loved
so much, would not have shown me such confidence if I really were
so evil . . . But if God created her such as she is, it is impossible to
effect more than His Divine Majesty permits and vouchsafes, and the
King her father could never do more until, to prevent her from de-
stroying herself by refusing to eat if she did not get her will, he had

The Second Regency 87

to give orders that force be applied to preserve her life. Was that my
fault? It was not in my hands nor in my power to avoid it" (Bergen-
roth, Letters and Papers, Supplement vol. II, #23). Ferrer's protests
were of no avail. By September 1516 he had been relieved of his
responsibilities, as Cisneros' letter to the King indicates. "Concerning
the guard for our Lady the Queen, your mother, the situation has
been remedied and is now well in hand ... I have sent in [Ferrer's]
place a gentleman by name of Hernan Duque d'Estrada, who has
long been in charge of important affairs and since he is a prudent and
experienced man, she is in good hands" (Cart. Xim. 144-5). Accord-
ing to Gomez, the new governor of the Queen's household showed
great sensitivity in his treatment of Juana and persuaded the dis-
turbed woman to adopt healthier practices and "abandon the difficult
and inhuman life" she had led so far {De rebus gestis, 429). Cisneros'
secretary, Jorge Varacaldo, is more matter-of-fact in accounting for
the changing of the guards: the Duke was "a good man and deserved
a favour" (Cart. Sec. Ep, 20).

The Cardinal's Militia

An anecdote related by Gomez de Castro reflects the politically
volatile situation encountered by Cisneros. Asked to show his letters
of authorization, Cisneros paraded his armed guard and told his
challengers "to communicate to their followers that he had received
no other authorization from Charles than the one they had seen
themselves" {De re bus gestis, 396-7). The story, although apocryphal,
shows Cisneros' determination. Faced with the threat of revolt, he
resorted to organizing a citizen militia. His initiative was immedi-
ately denounced as being, not a security measure, but a covert move
against the nobility and an effort to build up his personal rule. What-
ever Cisneros' motives, his actions were of questionable legality since
he had proceeded without awaiting Charles' approval of his plan.
Royal assent was given eventually, however (letter of 30 April,
quoted by Retana, Cisneros, II: 155). Recruits were attracted by spe-
cial privileges and tax exemptions in return for voluntary service. A
report by General Gil Rengifo sets out the incentives and penalties
for members of the militia (Retana, Cisneros, 11:158-9): They were to
be rewarded with pay in advance, tax advantages, exemption from
local jurisdiction for the duration of the campaign, and the right to
bear arms. When setting out for a campaign, they were to "go to

88 The Second Regency

confession and communion and swear the following oath: to serve
Your Highness well and loyally; to guard the churches, which con-
tain the Holy Sacrament, against robbery and dishonest acts ... to
guard the honour of women ... to die with their comrades in arms
and let no danger make turncoats of them. If they desert, their com-
rades must kill them" (quoted by Retana, Cisneros, 11:158). Cisneros'
biographer, Gomez de Castro, praised the moral advantages of offer-
ing employment of this sort: "Young men, if they are not employed
in honest ways, dissipate their life with pleasures, which are more
dangerous than arms." Military training, by contrast, was a most use-
ful occupation. "With organized militias such as these, powerful
nations have been defeated" {De rebus gestis, 402). More concretely,
"the formation of this militia meant trouble for the seditious element
that was fond of upheaval. It did away with opportunities to instigate
revolt and uprisings; and with the organization of the militia
disappeared the licence they took during the absence of the King"
(ibid., 403).

Cisneros recruited men between the ages of twenty and forty and
supplied them with arms. The bailiff {alguacit) of the town served as
the captain of the troop, supervised their training on the first Sunday
of every month, and was their paymaster. The reponse to Cisneros'
recruiting efforts was overwhelming. By September 1516 he had a
troop of more than 30,000 men; and he maintained the militia in the
face of considerable resistance from the nobility, who regarded his
action an infringement on their privileges, and of towns who found
the militia troublesome and sometimes paid not to have them within
their walls. They lodged complaints at Charles' court, but Cisneros
defended his initiative (letter from Varacaldo to Ayala, 14 Oct. 1516):
"The militia does not cost the King one maravedi. They are local
people and of modest means. There are captains in each city to train
them well in matters of ordinance and to drill them each week, and
there are few ruffians and criminals among them . . . They will
protect justice, make the King powerful, both inside the realm and
outside, and in all the world" (Cart. Sec. 39-40; cf. also p. 76). The
argument was repeated in another urgent letter to Ayala: "Tell the
King that he ought to give [Cisneros] freedom to act and that he
must not listen to talk. [Cisneros] knows more about the realm than
the rest and has the best intentions. We are surprised that in his letter
he gave instruction to disband the armed troop. We cannot under-

The Second Regency 89

stand how that can be, for if the troops now in Castile are disbanded,
it won't be long before the whole kingdom is ablaze" (Cart. Sec. 53;
cf. Cart. Xim. 169-70). Similar cautions appear also in letters written
in September and October 1516. The Cardinal warned Charles to
beware of the nobility, insisted that the recruits in the militia were
honest men, and emphasized that they did not burden the King
financially. Cisneros' arguments failed to win the day, however. An
investigation by Charles' emissary, Charles de la Chaulx, sent to
Spain in December, resulted in recruiting being suspended. The fol-
lowing October Cisneros was still recommending his troop to the
King. The mercenaries now stationed in Italy were expensive to
maintain and "commit crimes and acts of robbery wherever they
are." It would be better to deploy the militia of 25,000 honest men,
"who are not practiced criminals and if they do anything illegal can
be punished and cost nothing until the day they are called up to
serve" (Cart. Xim. 257).

In his chronicle of Charles' reign, Pero Mexia offers this evalua-
tion of Cisneros' project: "The Cardinal-regent regarded it useful for
the defense of the realm to have an armed corps of able and trained
men. He ordered that each city, town, and settlement in Castile have
a certain number of infantry and cavalry, ... to whom he conceded
certain tax exemptions, privileges, and other honours. At first this
was regarded by many as good instruction and government, but after-
wards there were reports to the contrary and many disadvantages
ensued. Tumult and discontent arose because some did not have the
arms the authorities were obliged to provide, others walked around
armed, left their work and assignments to do drills and exercises, and
. . . committed crimes." For this reason cities such as Salamanca,
Burgos, Leon, and Valladolid refused to comply with the order.
"And so the new order never had any beneficial effect or was not
reinforced, and afterwards, when the King's arrival was imminent, it
was decided that this kind of militia served no purpose and it was
disbanded" (Mexia, Cronica, 74).

External Threats: Navarre, North Africa, Sicily

Cisneros had to deal, not only with resistance from within, but
also with external threats to peace. Navarre had been annexed to Cas-
tile in 1515, but now Jean d'Albret, who had been dispossessed, saw
his chance to recapture his position. The matter had been drawn to

90 The Second Regency

Cisneros' attention by Charles who, in confirming his regency, had
instructed him to ensure peace in the kingdom of Navarre: "We
commission you to make the necessary provisions and take measures,
as you see fit and serves our best interest and ensures the pacification
and security of the said kingdom" (Cart. Sec. 226). Cisneros, well
aware of the dangerous situation in Navarre, attempted a negotiated
settlement, as letters exchanged between the two parties show. Jean
d'Albret, however, decided on the military option and invaded
Navarre in March 1516, supported by a French troop. He found the
border fortress, San Juan de Pie del Puerto, well defended. The small
garrison there was, moreover, reinforced by a Spanish force under
Fernando de Villalba. Martire gives a dramatic account of their
forced march: "They crossed the Pyrenees by difficult paths, through
deep ravines and along steep banks that were barely passable. They
were up to their knees in snow and had practically nothing to eat.
Nevertheless they overcame all obstacles and suffered all hardship.
Without boots, treading on thorns and pointed rocks covered with
snow, with their leggings and soldier's cloaks torn, they advanced
toward the enemy in forced marches" (Cart. Xim. 101). D'Albret
was forced to retreat and died a few months later. To secure the
region Cisneros ordered a number of fortifications razed, reasoning
that they might fall into enemy hands (Cart. Xim. 109). At the same
time, D'Albret's sympathizers were removed from key positions in
Navarre and deported. Cisneros nominated Antonio Manrique de
Lara y Castro, the Duke of Najera, to the position of viceroy and
saw his candidate confirmed by Charles.

Cisneros then turned his attention to securing the southern coast
of Spain and defending her influence in North Africa. Spanish pos-
sessions were threatened by the pirate Chair-ed-Din (Barbarossa). His
attack on Bougie was fought off with difficulty; the king of Tenes
suffered death at his hands, and his heirs turned for support to Spain.
On 25 April 1516 Cisneros sent news to Brussels that Algiers had
been taken: "A Turkish pirate called Barbarossa appeared in Algiers
and through plots and treason captured the place. This has caused
great discord and dissension among the Moors themselves, which is
bound to lead to their ruin" (Cart. Xim. 112).

Spanish plans to recoup Algiers and deal a blow to Barbarossa had
appeared successful at first. An encounter between Spanish and Turk-
ish ships at Alicante ended in victory for the former. Ruiz reported

The Second Regency 91

jubilantly that "our men destroyed the whole armada of the enemy
and killed four hundred and took prisoners, although only a few, for
they defended themselves with determination, preferring to die rather
than be taken prisoners . . . and we know that they were on their
way to bring relief to Algiers" (Cart. Xim. 126). Cisneros had al-
lotted funds to the maintainance and expansion of the fleet, an ex-
penditure unpopular with the court of Brussels, and now hoped that
this victory would justify his military policy in Charles' eyes. "His
Highness will see what advantage came of repairing and equipping
the galleys," he wrote (ibid.).

Diego de Vera, whom Cisneros had put in charge of the opera-
tion, appears to have been a poor choice, however. Pietro Martire
reported on the situation to Marliani: "Barbarossa has used the same
astute arguments that Mohammed once used against the Romans. He
has convinced the people [of Bougie and Algiers] to abandon the
Christian faith, saying it was unjust that the blessed and saintly fol-
lowers of Mohammed should obey and be subject to Christians, the
enemies of their religion. He promises, if they make him their King,
to free them (in accordance with the Moslem law) of the yoke of the
Christians and guarantee their safety. . . . On being informed of this,
our Cardinal-regent assembled an army of some eight thousand sol-
diers, who are now ready for the campaign. I shall make no predic-
tions about the outcome of this venture. In my opinion, he has not
chosen a general who is capable of leading this expedition. It is a cer-
tain Diego de Vera, a captain of the artillery. May God bless his ven-
ture. The man is more blustering and vainglorious than brave" (Ep.
574, July 1516). Vera's personal qualities may have been a factor in
the subsequent failure of the campaign, but there were other contri-
buting factors. He had difficulties obtaining the necessary provisions
and he set out with a poorly equipped and manned fleet. According
to Mosen Quint, the alcalde of Peiion del Argel, the crew consisted
of "monks and farmhands, who had never carried arms." The expe-
dition went ahead on 29 September, with disastrous results. In the
battle with Barbarossa some 3000 Spaniards were killed, but the im-
pact of the unfortunate campaign was minimized in official corres-
pondence. In October Cisneros' secretary, Jorge Varacaldo, wrote to
Ayala, asking him to control rumours: "His Majesty must be advised
. . . that Diego de Vera went to Algiers, as we informed His Majesty,
and since the Turks there had had advance warning, they obtained

92 The Second Regency

assistance from their allies and relatives and neighbours, so that they
could not have been better prepared. Diego de Vera was a little care-
less in putting a few people ashore and suffered some reverses. Some
were killed, but fewer than reported, and he was on the point of cor-
recting the situation. It was a small matter and deserved no attention.
Our information is unconfirmed, but even assuming that something
[adverse] happened, it is nothing much, and those who bear us a
grudge could magnify it at will" (Cart. Sec. 41-2). Cisneros himself
wrote to Ayala that "the business of Algiers was much less signifi-
cant than they would have you believe, for the number of prisoners
and dead did not exceed one thousand, and the cause of the loss was
the greed and disorganization of the infantry." The footsoldiers were
"vagabonds and wretches, fugitives from justice and criminals, who
wherever they go commit a thousand robberies in the villages
through which they pass." He took the opportunity once again to
recommend his militia, whose recruits were honest men and re-
specters of the law (Cart. Xim. 186-7).

Cisneros also revived plans of a crusade in the Eastern Mediter-
ranean. In the summer of 1516 he sought a renewal of the papal
privilege allowing the collection of a cruzada, a crusade tax. This sys-
tem of selling indulgences to finance military action against infidels
had developed into a regular crown revenue and was exacted with
unwarranted severity. The Castilian cortes of 1512 described the ex-
tortion practised by the preachers: "They keep men two or three
days in the churches from morning to evening and oblige the people
to listen to their sermons. Thus they prevent them from earning
their daily bread; and when they find that they cannot induce them
to accept the said [papal] Bull, they parade through the streets, asking
everyone they meet if they know their Our Father and Hail Mary;
and if by chance they find anyone who does not, they force him to
accept the said Bull as a penance; and if any one fails to do so, they
drag him along in shackles, making him listen to their preachings,
and thus force him at last by compulsion and intimidation to do
their will" (quoted by Merriman, Spanish Empire, II: 132-3).

Cisneros was keen on having the papal privilege renewed in order
to finance the planned campaign in the Mediterranean. He noted in
October 1516 that France had obtained preferential treatment (he
was referring to the Concordat of Bologna), whereas he was still
waiting for permission to collect the crusade tax (Cart. Xim. 165). In

The Second Regency 93

December he returned to this subject: "The King of France has been
given the right to make church appointments and to levy crusade tax
even though he has never fought a war against the infidels as did
Spain, and has never shed blood for the faith" (Cart. Xim. 185). It
was only in response to his protests that Pope Leo X promised, in a
brief of December 1516, to renew the privilege of the Spanish
Crown. Negotiations with the pope continued during spring of 1517.
The minutes of a memorandum written by Cisneros in March 1517
read: "In view of the great damage that has been and is being done
by the Turks and other infidels in the maritime areas of Spain and in
other realms, to the detriment of Your Highness [Charles] and Chris-
tendom, and desiring a remedy, it is my opinion that they cannot be
remedied in any other way but by requesting the crusade tax from
the Holy Father . . . and since His Holiness saw that this was neces-
sary he wrote to me a brief in which he effectively conceded the said
crusade tax" (Cart. Xim. 264-5). But he could not proceed without
a bull officially granting him the privilege of levying the tax. This
was not the only factor causing a delay. It was also necessary to wait
for Charles' arrival in Spain, for only then could matters be expe-
dited. At present, he said in a candid letter to his secretary Varacaldo,
the motivation was lacking. "Even if the [bull granting the] crusade
tax arrives — if His Highness does not come to his realm, what has
been done will be of little benefit, for those who must serve in such
expeditions, want to put their king and lord under obligation and be
rewarded for their labour with prizes and titles" (Cart. Xim. 270).

During Cisneros' regency troubles also erupted in Sicily, where
the people rose in revolt against the unpopular viceroy, Hugo de
Moncada. Pero Mexia describes the circumstances: "When the
people of the city of Palermo heard that the Catholic King had died,
they claimed that the power of the viceroy had lapsed with his death.
They refused obedience and discussed the appointment of governors.
Certain counts and barons hostile toward Moncada because he had
brought them to justice were reportedly the moving force behind the
rebellion" (Mexia, Cronica, 69). They incited the people to storm
the Palace of the Inquisition and attack the viceroy's seaside mansion.
According to Pietro Martire, the rebel's fury was directed at Mon-
cada personally. In the end, Moncada accepted the inevitable and
departed for Naples. Cisneros first reported on the situation in Sicily
in a letter of 25 April 1516 (Cart. Xim. 112). In August and in De-

94 The Second Regency

cember he advised once again that "Naples and Sicily are in great
danger" (Cart. Xim. 127, 186). In Naples the viceroy Ramon de
Cardona was able to maintain control; the Sicilian uprising was
contained with difficulty. In 1518 Charles replaced Moncada with
Hector Pignatelli, Count of Monteleone. Thereafter an uneasy peace
prevailed.

The Final Months

iVluch of the information on the diplomatic whirl preceding Char-
les' arrival comes from letters exchanged between Cisneros' represen-
tative in Brussels, Diego Lopez de Ayala, and the two men who
looked after Cisneros' correspondence: the jurist Jorge Varacaldo and
Francisco Ruiz, Bishop of Avila. Ruiz, a native of Toledo, had en-
tered Cisneros' service when he was a young man of eighteen, as has
been mentioned. He became his confidant and was a loyal follower,
but lacked sophistication and displayed little talent for diplomacy.
The letters he sent to Ayala during the frequent illnesses of the Car-
dinal are written in a crude style and contain many colloquialisms.
He was, moreover, unrealistic in his estimate of Cisneros' power and
correspondingly insensitive to the power play at the Burgundian court.
The jurist Jorge Varacaldo, by contrast, was entirely realistic. He
had been in Cisneros' service since 1509, and in January 1516 was
despatched to Brussels for two months as the Cardinal's personal
emissary (Cart. Xim. 196). While not disloyal to the Cardinal, he
kept a sharp lookout for his own interests. The Cardinal had ap-
pointed him Secretary of the Military Orders, but the appointment
needed royal assent, and he frequently importuned Ayala to obtain
ratification of the document. He finally achieved his object, but his
pleasure was short-lived. The King reversed his position, as a letter
from Cisneros to Ayala indicates. "You knew how to obtain for
Secretary Varacaldo the secretaryship of the Orders of Santiago, Cala-
trava, and Alcantara in the name of His Highness," he wrote. "... I
have now been told that His Highness had not been well informed
about this matter and wishes to appoint another person to this office.
Since the change is not in his interest and no one but the said secre-
tary should have the post, you must speak about it to His Highness"
(Cart. Xim. 120). Nothing could be done, however, and Varacaldo
had to relinquish the post.

96 The Final Months

Letters exchanged between Cisneros and representatives at the
court in Brussels show that the question of his own authority re-
mained on the agenda. Cisneros felt that he must have more discre-
tion over patronage appointments, for "to have the authority to take
away but not to give is the devil of a job and makes him enemies
everywhere," Varacaldo wrote candidly (Cart. Sec. 44) in October
1516. He returned to this subject in another letter to Ayala, asking
him to make clear to Charles that Cisneros had "to govern and satis-
fy many people, so that it is imperative that he give them something
and to bestow favours on them or else he cannot but encounter
difficulties" (Cart. Sec. 56).

The appointment of foreigners or expatriates to prestigious posi-
tions created much resentment. The general opinion was that Spanish
wealth was being funnelled into foreign coffers, as decisions were
being made by an absentee court. Many complained of Charles' ad-
visors at the Burgundian court, Martire wrote. "It is unjust that the
affairs of Spain should be subject to the dictates of the Flemish in the
North. Their mentality and upbringing is very different from the
Spanish custom" (Ep. 580). Widespread corruption was alleged. Cis-
neros' secretary requested Ayala to discuss the matter of patronage
appointments for courtiers in Brussels: "Let those gentlemen protect
their honour. The custom in Spain is different from the custom in
Flanders. Here we do not allow that anyone does things other than
in a clean-cut fashion and as they ought to be done" (Cart. Sec. 18).
Alonso Manrique, another of Cisneros' correspondents, confirmed
that the Burgundian court was rife with corruption. He used the
occasion to assure the Cardinal of his own integrity. He had delibe-
rately refrained from asking any favour for himself, to demonstrate
that not all Spaniards were self-seeking (Cart. Sec. 269).

Conversely, Cisneros was accused at the court in Brussels of
acting from motives of personal ambition and without regard for
Charles' interests. Adrian of Utrecht appears to have been one of the
accusers. The Cardinal asked Ayala to counter his allegations and
convince Charles that he was the King's greatest asset in Spain (Cart.
Sec. 19). Ruiz wrote in a similar vein, defending his patron in a letter
to Charles, but it appears that Ayala, whom he used as go-between,
did not think it advisable to convey Ruiz' outspoken letter to the
King. Reacting to allegations that Cisneros had been critical of the
Burgundian court and was not acting in good faith, Ruiz wrote:

The Final Months 97

If Your Highness knew the work that is being done in your
interest, you would have given instruction to write us a friend-
lier letter than this one, to give strength and courage to your
servants to undertake such great burdens, especially to myself,
because with all the illness that afflicted the Cardinal, the great-
er part of the labour rested on my shoulders, and the labour is
so great that since the death of the Catholic King of blessed
memory, the Cardinal and I have each been sick twice and we
expect to die in this labour, unless Your Highness rescues us
with his hoped-for arrival ... let it be known to Your Highness
who are your true servants . . . [Far from acting in bad faith], we
have, because of our loyalty and services to Your Highness,
made enemies of the people in many ways, both here and there
[in Burgundy], because we do not wish to do anything for them
that is a disservice to God and Your Highness . . . [Cisneros'
enemies] frequently visited the ambassador [Adrian]. We have
no suspicions of him — he is a person of integrity and of angelic
character — but under the pretext that it is for the good and in
the service of Your Highness, these people make him [Adrian]
write some of those things, for the purpose I have indicated,
and they blame it all on me, because, as I have said, they don't
dare to blame the Cardinal. (Cart. Sec. 23-4)

In August 1516, when the Cardinal was still entertaining hopes
that Charles would arrive in Spain later that year, he begged the King
to delay making further appointments until that date. "For at that
time Your Highness will be able to obtain information of what needs
to be done and who is best suited for the said offices. It would be in
your interest not to make provisions about anything and to make no
promises of any kind until you are here in your kingdoms. You will
be able to make much better decisions concerning everything after
some consultation and deliberation. And as soon as a decision has
been made regarding your journey, it is imperative that you take care
to advise me of it, for I intend to go to Burgos to join Your Highness
on your disembarkation" (Cart. Xim. 130).

Charles' journey was delayed for another year, however, while
negotiations with France continued in an effort to secure the borders
of the Netherlands during his absence. The treaty of Noyon, which
provided the guarantees needed for Charles' departure, was con-
cluded too late in the year to allow him to set out. His departure

98 The Final Months

accordingly had to be delayed until the next spring. In the meantime,
two new representatives arrived from the Burgundian court: Amers-
torff and La Chaulx. The latter may have come in the capacity of a
judge (cf. Cart. Xim. 183). Pero Mexia speaks of his mission in vague
terms. He was to "explain the reasons for the delay in Charles' de-
parture and other important matters" (Mexia, Cronica, 78). Cisneros
was naturally protective of his powers, which he did not wish to see
curtailed by the King's delegates. A diplomatic war ensued about
points of etiquette. Cisneros refused to pay La Chaulx the courtesy
of riding out to meet him on his arrival; on seeing his signature on
official documents, he had them torn up and rewritten over his own
signature. On Cisneros' instructions, his secretary, Varacaldo, pro-
tested inroads on the Cardinal's authority: "According to the instruc-
tions sent to the ambassador [Adrian]," he noted defensively, "all
matters pertaining to jurisdiction have been left in the Cardinal's
hands. The matter of appointing judges [La Chaulx.^] is an important
one. I cannot understand that they would not realize the inappropri-
ateness of this new development" (7 Dec. 1516, Ep. 16, Cart. Sec. 91).
According to Gomez, the Cardinal himself wrote to Charles out-
lining his position: "Only he, and no Belgian, nor indeed the King
himself until he reached majority, had the right to appoint judges in
the royal tribunals, . . . city prefects, treasury officials [etc]; . . . and it
was he whose business it was to look after the garrisons and their
prefects . . . and the ministers in the Privy Council" {De rebus gestis,
470). Not surprisingly, the Burgundians judged that Cisneros "had
written with great clarity but not enough prudence and astuteness"
(471). A follow-up letter written in the name of Cisneros and the
Royal Council was more respectful but once again requested in so
many words that important offices not be entrusted to foreigners.
The request was couched in diplomatic terms: "In former days no
one was entrusted with more elevated tasks unless he had previously
passed through lower offices and given proof of his valour and integ-
rity" (475). Burgundians continued to enjoy the King's favour, how-
ever, and receive important posts, to the frustration of the Spanish
nobles, who accused the foreigners of despoiling their country.

In 1517 Cisneros saw his competitor for the governmental auth-
ority, Adrian of Utrecht, elevated to the cardinalate. He had been
aware of the plan for some time, but did not know the details. In
October 1516, he asked Ayala to investigate a rumour concerning

The Final Months 99

negotiations with the Pope that "someone be made cardinal this
Christmas on Charles' request. But we do not know for whom he re-
quests the honour." He instructed Ayala to pursue the matter and
see "that it be delayed and that nothing more be said of it until the
King comes to this realm" (Cart. Sec. 43-4). Adrian was one of
thirty-one cardinals created by Leo X in June 1517, an act that gener-
ated much ill will. Reform-minded Christians everywhere deplored
the appointments as simoniacal and cheapening the dignity of the
office. Martire's reaction was typical. He took a dim view of the
events: "The Pope has . . . created thirty-one cardinals in one month,
going against the opinion of the incumbent cardinals. Everyone is
biting their lips in anger. The general opinion is that it was done to
collect money. The status of the cardinals has been lowered" (Ep.
596). Cisneros shared Martire's feelings about the wholesale appoint-
ments, but his specific objection was, no doubt, to yet another pa-
tronage appointment for a non-Spaniard.

In the meantime preparations for Charles' departure for Spain
began in earnest. On 7 September the royal party embarked on the
journey. While Cisneros was making preparations to meet Charles,
he fell ill. There were rumours that he had been poisoned. Gomez
reports that the Cardinal received a warning not to eat trout pre-
pared for him because it contained a powerful poison. Cisneros, how-
ever, ignored the warning. The person who served and pretasted the
trout was reported to have taken ill as well. Martire offers a less sen-
sational explanation for Cisneros' illness: old age and the raw climate
of northern Spain. "He was born and raised in the protected south-
ern part of the mountains of Segovia. The northern air harms him
quite a bit. The physicians predict that his days are numbered. He is
more than eighty years old" (Ep. 598). Cisneros recovered, however,
and set out to meet the king.

On 19 September 1517 the royal fleet reached the coast of Spain.
Charles and his retinue made an unplanned landing at Villaviciosa
between Gijon and Santander. Martire tells us that they were caught
in a violent storm and driven off course. Charles and his sister Elea-
nor reportedly weathered the situation, but the rest suffered from
seasickness. There were anxious moments, moreover, when the royal
party was given what appeared to be a hostile reception:

When the people [of Villaviciosa] saw an unknown fleet
approach, they assumed that it was a French maneuver. They

100 The Final Months

hurriedly took up arms and evacuated the women, children, and
old people to the safety of the mountains. Everyone capable of
bearing arms . . . occupied the hills looking out on the sea and
they took their stand determined to offer resistance. A fair
spectacle! From the royal ship a cry arose: Spain! Spain! Our
Catholic King, our King! When they heard the cry, they
dropped [their weapons] . . . Unarmed, they thronged the beach.
They saluted the King with all due respect and fetched back
their families and household goods from the mountains. With
apparent signs of joy they received the King into their midst.
(Ep. 599)

Charles and his retinue now proceeded inland toward Valladolid.
The Cardinal's health was still precarious, but he advanced to meet
the King. As soon as he was informed of the King's arrival,
moreover, he took measures to dispatch Prince Ferdinand to the
Netherlands.

Cisneros and the Infante Ferdinand

In the wake of King Ferdinand's death there had been concern
that rebellious nobles would seize on Charles' younger brother, Fer-
dinand, as their pretender. At the time Cisneros preempted any such
action by having the Infante brought to Castile and keeping him
under close supervision. In a letter to Ayala the Cardinal describes
the situation (Cart. Xim. 62, p. 104): "After the death of the Catholic
King I went to Guadalupe with the sole purpose of looking after the
affairs of Prince Ferdinand and to avoid revolts and upheavals in the
realm such as occurred at other times in like situations. And after-
wards I did not risk being apart from him for one single day." His
purpose was to minimize the risk of plotting. He feared that the
fourteen-year-old prince, disappointed by the provisions of his grand-
father's will, would be open to suggestions of asserting his claims to
Aragon. He therefore advised Charles to "appoint two persons to
take charge of the Infante — trusted men, for those in charge now are
not at all suitable" (Cart. Xim. 104). He was referring to Ferdinand's
guardian, the Commendador Mayor Pedro Niifies de Guzman, and
his tutor, the Dominican Alvaro Osorio, bishop of Astorga. By April
1517 Cisneros was convinced that there was a conspiracy among
Aragonese nobles favouring the succession of Prince Ferdinand. In
September Ayala was requested to inform Charles that a "diabolical"

The Final Months 101

plot had been discovered, whose instigator was the Bishop of Astorga
(Cart. Sec. 151). Cisneros himself wrote to ask again that the Prince's
retinue be dismissed and his guardians be replaced with "two men
who are not from Spain" (Cart. Xim. 154, Sept. 1516). It was advisa-
ble to remove the Prince from the country, he said, but not until
Charles himself had arrived. The following month he again asked for
directions in this matter. At the same time the Bishop of Astorga
departed for Brussels, "supposedly to take care of matters concerning
the Infante entrusted to him by the Catholic King," as Varacaldo
reported. He requested Ayala to watch the Bishop closely: "He is the
most devious and unmanageable creature ever born, a master of evil
arts and evil tongue and, so help me God, I fear if he obtains access
to our liege, the King, he will poison him" (Cart. Sec. 60). In Octo-
ber Varacaldo wrote another letter to Ayala, requesting him to re-
mind the King of the urgency of the situation. "As far as the business
of the Infante is concerned," he wrote in code, "His Majesty must
act, for it is more necessary than ever. Make sure that there is no
delay about this, but the King must make every effort to come [to
Spain]" (Cart. Sec. 41). He offered to give the King proof of the con-
spiracy on his arrival.

Shortly thereafter Cisneros took action, dismissing and replacing
Ferdinand's retainers. The move came as a surprise to many. Ob-
viously the plans had been well concealed. The young prince, who
had formed strong attachments to some members of his retinue, was
shaken. He remonstrated with Cisneros, but the cardinal persisted in
his plans, which he said originated with Charles. An awkward inter-
view took place:

Ferdinand, almost crying, complained to Cisneros that he, whom
he thought to be his friend, was treating him badly by depriving
him, for no reason, of his attendants, who had been with him
for a long time and were good and loyal men. . . . Cisneros tried
to calm the anxious prince with friendly words and promises of
great things and a high position at the court of his brother, if he
showed himself obedient . . . Cisneros' words had no effect and
did not convince the prince, and he replied: "So far I have
experienced your love toward me, but now that I need it most
I don't know where it has flown to. You have decided to ruin
me and my friends, although you could help us. I have to find
means to ensure that they come to no harm." At this Cisneros

102 The Final Months

was vexed and said somewhat more harshly: "Do as you please,
Ferdinand, but I swear to you on your brother's head that, even
if all of Spain worked against it, the orders of the King must be
executed before tomorrow evening, and you more than anyone
else must obey him."

This is the account given by Gomez. Martire, too, related the events
in a letter dated 15 September 1517, concluding: "The whole Court
was astounded by this sudden change. The cause is still unknown"
(Ep. 600).

Although Gomez' dramatic version details a personal encounter
between Ferdinand and the Cardinal, it was in fact Francisco Ruiz
who took charge of the matter on behalf of his ailing master. Taking
pride in his personal involvement he asked Ayala to report to the
King: "I have fulfilled the royal command to dismiss the Commenda-
dor Mayor and the Bishop of Astorga and Gonzalo de Guzman
from the company of the Infante. The Cardinal was, as I said, indis-
posed, but I acted with such great diligence that the matter was trans-
acted within a day. The whole world was astonished at such daring.
Since His Highness at present has no other heir or successor but
[Ferdinand], no one dared to do what we did, and to displease him in
this manner; especially since people, for the most part, thought that
His Highness would not come [to Spain]." Even after it was known
that the royal party had embarked, there was speculation that they
might perish at sea and fate might play into the hands of Ferdinand.
He indicated, moreover, that he faced opposition from Adrian of
Utrecht. "The Dean of Tortosa [Adrian] gave us so much trouble
. . . for he and they were very close, so that not much was missing
and the whole realm would have risen in rebellion, and the fact is
that all correspondence came to him [Adrian] and, without saying
anything to the Cardinal, he opened it, and then advised the Infante
of everything . . . We entrusted the Infante to the Marques de Aguilar
. . . and may it please His Highness not to make any changes . . . and
tell Your Highness that in [the Cardinal's] opinion he should under
no circumstances admit the Infante to his presence, for if they are
together, it could happen that they destroy each other, for as soon as
he has access to him, he will beg him to do what would give the
whole realm much satisfaction, that is, not to send him away, poor
and hopeless as he was. But in that respect he suffers no hardship,
since our liege has given him a rich inheritance and will give him

The Final Months 103

more" (Cart. Sec. 137-9). On 20 October Ruiz reported to Ayala
that the Prince had resigned himself to the facts and made the best of
the situation. "To show that he was complying with the wishes of
our liege the King in all things, he dismissed twenty-seven persons
who had been put at his service by the men who used to take care of
him. His Highness ought to write him a gracious letter to thank him
for everything" (Cart. Sec. 172).

The question has been raised whether Cisneros dismissed Ferdi-
nand's retinue on his own authority or on orders from Charles.
Much of the evidence points to the conclusion that he was acting on
instruction. Ruiz at any rate refers (in the letter just quoted) to a
"royal injunction" {rreal mandamiento) . Instructions to this effect are
not extant but are cited by Cisneros' biographer Gomez and by Pero
Mexia in his Cronica ("ansi lo embio a mandar el Rey," p. 82).
Finally there is a letter from Charles praising Cisneros' course of
action: "As you know, I have written to the Most Illustrious Prince
Ferdinand, my dear and much beloved brother, that I consider your
actions well done" (quoted by Retana, Cisneros, II: 388). No doubt
Ferdinand was a political liability and was dispatched to the Nether-
lands on Charles' arrival in Spain "for the greater peace of Castile,"
as Mexia explained {Cronica, 82).

Charles' Inland Journey

Charles' first concern was to proceed to Tordesillas and meet his
mother, whom he had not seen for eleven years. Ruiz suggested that
her state of mind was such that "Charles could well be pardoned for
not paying her this courtesy visit" (153). The visit was not merely a
matter of courtesy, however. Protocol, and indeed reasons of state,
demanded that Charles meet with his mother to procure for himself
the authorization to assume royal power. The meeting went well, as
Pietro Martire reported: "The Queen put on clean clothes, which she
rarely does, because she thinks that widowhood must manifest itself
in a dirty appearance. And on her own initiative she gave them
[Charles and his sister Eleanor] presents. But she has not the least
concern for her realm. It's all the same to her whether Spain is
ruined or prospers" (Ep. 602).

The next step was to meet with Cisneros and to hold cortes to
formally receive their oath of fealty. Valladolid was the most suitable
meeting place, as Cisneros informed the King. It offered a healthy

104 The Final Months

location and had the necessary facilities to provide food and lodging
for so large a gathering (Cart. Xim. 222). The Cardinal himself had
advanced as far as Aranda, but poor health impeded further progress.
Because of rumours of an outbreak of the plague he took refuge in
the nearby Monastery of Aguilera. There was fear also for the health
of the royal party and talk of moving the cortes to Segovia or even
Toledo. In the meantime the members of the Regency Council had
been chafing at the bit. Cisneros complained in a letter of 28 Septem-
ber that they had defied orders: "Your Highness wrote that the
Infante and the ambassador and the council and the whole court
should remain where they are and not move until Your Highness has
sent instructions on where we were to meet His Majesty. . . . The
members of the council ignored this and left Aranda and advanced to
a place some five leagues from here and have ruined the business of
the suppliers of this court. It is unbelievable that the members of the
council would dare shamelessly to disobey the command of Your
Highness" (Cart. Xim. 225). Apparently the king supported Cisneros
and rebuked the council for its insubordination. They returned to
Aranda and sent a letter of apology to the Cardinal (Cart. Sec. 150).
In October Cisneros was still holding on to his authority as re-
gent. Ruiz informed an unidentified addressee that Charles "did not
intend to make any decisions until he had met [with Cisneros] ... it
was not at all in the interest of [the King] to act until he had seen the
Cardinal, for he will inform him of everything and give him an
account of all persons and tell him everything that concerns the
interests of his realm" (Cart. Xim. 256). By the end of the month the
Cardinal's health had taken a turn for the worse, however, A mes-
sage arrived from the King at the beginning of November, citing the
Cardinal to a meeting in Mojados, some 75 kilometers from Aranda.
This was to be Cisneros' final act as regent: "Once public concerns
and specific problems had been discussed and [Cisneros'] suggestions
for the organization of the service at court had been received, he
could retire to his house and rest. He may then trust that he would
receive from God the reward for the labours he had undertaken on
behalf of the realm, since no mortal could give him the thanks he
deserved. As long as he lived, the King would remember him and
have for him the same esteem and consideration as an obedient son
toward his good parents." Gomez noted that two versions con-
cerning the King's message were circulating in his time. According to

The Final Months 105

one, Cisneros read the letter, "felt rejected and repulsed, and had a
fatal attack of fever." According to the other, Cisneros was already
gravely ill the evening before the message arrived, and the letter "was
not given to the Cardinal but sent on to the Royal Council" {De
rebus gestis, 523). The first variant, that a tersely worded letter citing
him to Mojados hastened Cisneros' death, is no doubt romantic
embroidery. We have Ruiz' letter to Ayala confirming that the in-
structions to go to Mojados never reached Cisneros. "The Cardinal
of Tortosa [Adrian] today sent to the Cardinal the letters that came
for the Council concerning the matter of the departure. And in my
opinion it was not advisable to give them to him, for it could be that
in view of the unfortunate condition of the Cardinal His Highness
[King Charles] might change his proposal concerning the journey to
Mojados." In a postscript he noted that the Cardinal's health was fail-
ing rapidly and had entered a critical phase. The following day, 8
November, Cisneros died, comforted by the sacraments.

According to custom, his body was dressed in clerical robes and
laid out, so that the people might file past and kiss his hand. As
usual, an indulgence was granted on the occasion. His body was then
embalmed and transported to Alcala, where he was buried. A monu-
ment of white marble was erected in his honour, bearing an inscrip-
tion composed by the humanist Juan Vergara:

I, Franciscus, founded a great school for the Muses; I myself am
laid to rest in a narrow coffin. I combined the purple with sack-
cloth, the bishop's hat with the helmet. I was a monk and a
general, a bishop and a cardinal. My valour united the monk's
hood with the crown, when Spain obeyed me as its regent.
(Gomez, De rebus gestis, 527)

Gomez concludes his account of Cisneros' life with a eulogy of
his character and habits:

He expressed his views with brevity, his replies were pertinent
and without digressions; indeed he was very sparing with words,
even when he was angry. When he promised to return a favour
received, he gave more than he had promised. He rarely spoke
about matters that were insignificant. He frequently quoted
the saying of Cicero: "Nature has created us, not that we give
ourselves over to diversions and pastimes, but that we might

106 The Final Months

engage in serious matters and worthy enterprises." {De rebus
gestis, 530)

According to Gomez, the Cardinal was subject to bouts of depres-
sion, and on those occasions sought soHtude. Otherwise, he had a
strong will and much determination, quoting Sallust's "If you have
made a decision, carry it out at once." He was devoted to scholarship
and "during dinner was in the habit of having questions put to him
on certain subjects, especially sacred subjects, and listen to the dispu-
tations of learned men who were always present at his table. He
often attended the dialectical disputations of young students, for as
he said, the good farmer makes use of short sprouts as much as of
branches laden with fruit" {De rebus gestis, 531). Although generally
an austere man, he took great pleasure in a jester, Francesillo by name,
whose wit he appreciated. As was the custom of the time, he kept for
his amusement a dwarf, Sanchez Pumilion, and a simpleton who
entertained him with confused recitations of passages from the Bible.
Gomez provides this detailed description of the Cardinal's ap-
pearance:

He was tall, vigorous, and well proportioned. He walked with
a quiet, natural dignity. His voice was strong and even like that
of the heroes celebrated by the poet. His face was long and lean,
his forehead wide and smooth. His eyes small, sunk rather than
protruding, but penetrating and lively and moist like those of
people who cry often. His nose was large and curved — like the
beak of an eagle, as the Greeks say. The holes of his nose were
big and wide. His teeth narrowly spaced, but with the canine
teeth protruding so that jokers called him "The Elephant". His
lips were quite thick and somewhat open, his upper lip being
raised a little, but not excessively. His ears were small, not
drooping, but attached along the whole line to the end of the
jaw. His upper body was a third larger than his lower body. {De
rebus gestis, 529-30)

The archbishopric of Toledo, vacated by Cisneros' death, was
conferred on Chievres' nephew. The appointment caused much
resentment. The recipient was a teenager and — perhaps an even
greater affront to Spanish sensibilities — a foreigner. "There was
some muttering in the country," Mexia reports, "when they said
that so great a dignity was conferred on a foreigner . . . but in these

The Final Months 107

as in other matters the fault was not the King's but of those who,
instead of giving him advice concerning the appointment, requested
it for themselves" {Cronica, 83-4). Martire similarly noted that the
appointment was "against the laws and customs of the kingdom" and
expressed the fear, moreover, that it "opened the door through
which untold quantities of money could leave the country" (Ep. 602,
pp. 286-7).

The Image of the Cardinal

vJomez de Castro gives this account of the Cardinal's reputation in
his time:

Many people thought that Cisneros had a mania for building;
others that he had more of a mania for warfare than was proper
for a bishop. Many thought that he was a champion of letters
and patron of scholars on a grand scale . . . The diversity of
verdicts stemmed from no other cause but from the fact that
once he entered on a task, he devoted all his energies to it, so
that it seemed as if he was born for it and a natural disposition
had driven him to this undertaking. {De rebus gestis, 365)

Gomez put his finger on a trait that was a predominant and striking
aspect of the Cardinal's character. He was compulsive in all his ac-
tions. Once he had decided on a course of action, he was fanatical in
its pursuit. Fanaticism governed his reforms and his missionary ac-
tivities; singlemindedness characterized his political actions; uncom-
promising self-discipline his private life. An inability to delegate may
have been his weak point. For the sake of keeping charge of affairs,
he surrounded himself with mediocre men, whom he could control,
who were his devoted servants but never rose to be his disciples or
carry on his life's work.

In the seventeenth century the image of the Cardinal became
polarized. Some saw in him a saint; others a shrewd politician. Two
groups of sources are of particular interest in this context: tracts from
the 1650s and '60s supporting the canonization of Cisneros; and a
clutch of biographies comparing him with Cardinal Richelieu.

Among the first is Pedro de Quintanilla y Mendoza's /I rc^et^^o de
Virtudes, Espexo de Prelados: El Venerable Padre y Siervo de Dios F.
Francisco Ximenes de Cisneros (Archetype of Virtues and Mirror of
Prelates: The Venerable Father and Servant of God, Fray Francisco

The Image of the Cardinal 109

Ximenes de Cisneros; Palermo, 1653). This eulogy is prefaced by a
letter to Pope Innocent X, dated at the College of San Ildefonso,
1650, and asking for the beatification of the founder, A first applica-
tion had been prepared in 1633 but went no further. Another at-
tempt in 1650 received the support of the University of Alcala, but
the efforts of Cisneros' admirers remained without issue and were
abandoned in the eighteenth century. The evidence collected did not
fulfil its designated purpose but it assured Cisneros a saintly reputa-
tion. Quintanilla had read widely on his subject in prepration for the
task at hand. He drew on archival material in the University of
Alcala and on the accounts of the royal historians as well as on
Gomez de Castro's Life. It is evident that he approached his sources
with certain historiographical and research skills. Indeed he made
some factual corrections to the material, but he cannot be called an
objective observer. His purpose and his official commission was to
portray Cisneros as a saint. As can be expected, he minimized nega-
tive aspects, focused on Cisneros' religious reforms and missionary
activities, and capitalized on his "miracles". According to Quintanilla
(and earlier biographers) Cisneros fed his companions with bread
from heaven in the wilderness and produced a sparkling stream of
water to quench their thirst; on another journey he and his compan-
ions miraculously survived a shipwreck; a cross appeared in the sky
when he conquered Oran; he "had the wind in his sleeves" when
crossing between Spain and North Africa; heavenly crows pecked out
the eyes of his Moorish enemies; he extinguished a blaze by praying;
he levitated and prayed with such fervor that a "supernatural sweat"
appeared on his brow.

An undated Responsio ad animadversiones Reverendissimi D. Pro-
mothoris Fidei super dubio an constet de virtutibus theologalibus . . .
(Response to the queries of the Most Reverend Promoter of Faith
about doubts regarding [Cisneros'] theological virtues . . .) provides
information supplementary to the application for beatification and
canonization. It answers questions raised by the authorities concern-
ing the number and character of witnesses cited and addresses con-
cerns about the hearsay nature and dubious historical value of some
of the testimony given. Bound with this volume are Decreta sacra
rituum congregationis infavorem causae beatificationis et canonizationis
. . . Francisci Ximenez de Cisneros .. . a sanctissimis pontificibus . . .
concessa (Sacred Decrees of the Congregation of Rites in favour of the

110 The Image of the Cardinal

application for the beatification and canonization of Franciscus Xi-
menez de Cisneros and issued by the most sacred popes; last item
dated 1671), which cites briefs from Popes Urban VII, Innocent X,
Alexander VII, and Clement IX and X, that is, character references
from the highest authorities dating from the sixteenth to the eigh-
teenth century. Another biographical account, Vida y motivos de la
comun aclamacion de . . . Cisneros (Madrid, 1673), compiled by Pedro
Fernandez de Pulgar, canon of Palencia, was dedicated to the Arch-
bishop of Toledo, Pasqual Cardinal of Aragon. Designed to supply
information to the archbishop, "for it is Your Eminence who must
receive the communication from the Holy See in order to establish
a public cult for the Venerable Servant of God [Cisneros]," it was
kept brief "to relieve Your Eminence from reading the rather
lengthy documentation." In spite of a promise "to tell some new
things unpublished until now," Fernandez de Pulgar presents a well
rehearsed story. He does, however, add to the list of miracles, which
now includes the fact that Cisneros had control over natural phe-
nomena ("the sun stopped, the winds dropped, the clouds moved,
birds descended — the Servant of God ruled them by divine dispensa-
tion," p. 28). Another notable feature of this Life is an appendix of
"authors which in published works . . . have celebrated the virtues,
miracles, or deeds of . . . Ximenez de Cisneros" — a list containing
some 450 entries and spanning two centuries.

Perhaps the most interesting and certainly the most extraordinary
testimony to the Cardinal's enduring fame as a saintly man is an
anonymous play published in Madrid, 1740. It is ascribed to "a talent
at this court" and bears the florid title Pluma, Purpura, y Espada solo
en Cisneros se halla (Pen, Purple, and Sword are only united in
Cisneros). Although the Cardinal's conquest of Oran is the main
subject of the play, there is a parallel romantic plot, which justifies
its designation as a "new comedy". The action is further lightened
by the words and deeds of one "Fray Giropa" (modelled on Francis-
co Ruiz), who plays Sancho Panza to Cisneros' Don Quijote-like
character. The actions and thoughts ascribed to Cisneros are largely
historical; the peripheral anecdotes, especially the miracles, closely
follow Quintanilla's Archetypo. The dramatizations skilfully evoke
the Cardinal's character, as described by his early biographers. One
scene elaborates on his reluctance to become Isabel's confessor and,
later, to accept the arbishopric of Toledo.

The Image of the Cardinal

111

Cisneros:
Giropa:
Cisneros:
Giropa:

Giropa: Is it possible that you can be ungrateful for the zeal
shown on your behalf by the Queen in making you
archbishop of Toledo, and that you should flee from
her?

I am unworthy of such a position.
Are you not confessor of Her Highness?
Out of obedience.

Well, then, you know what I think. Father? Don't
you know that the archbishopric is worth three
hundred thousand ducats or more?

Cisneros: And of what importance is that, brother?

Giropa: Of what importance? If they gave me two hundred,
I'd accept the mitre, and if it were of Morocco!

Reflecting on Cisneros' reputation at court, Girope cites Martire's
description, also quoted by Quintanilla: "You are a second Ambrose
of Milan." To convince Cisneros to accept the archbishopric, he
launches into a rehearsal of his accomplishments, supplying the
audience with the necessary biographical background information.
Giropa's eulogy is in effect a summary of the first two chapters of
Quintanilla's book and closely adheres to some of the formulations
found there.

Cisneros' strict observance of the Franciscan rule offers another
occasion for comic relief. In accordance with the rules, he rejects a
carriage ride and, to the consternation of his tired companion, insists
on walking. He prefers solitude to the temptations of the world, ex-
plaining:

In the desert one may enjoy more readily the pres-
ence of God.

True. But even more so, if one doesn't have to walk
on foot.

How, then, would you like to be conveyed?
In a carriage . . .
This is a rare form of madness. You would like a

Cisneros:

Giropa:

Cisneros:

Giropa:

Cisneros:

carnage?

Giropa: I would take even a hired donkey.

Cisneros insists on walking, however. Crossing the wilderness with
his companion, he works several miracles. Here the playwright is
partly following Quintanilla's account (the miraculous production of

112 The Image of the Cardinal

bread and water), partly introducing new scenarios (an encounter with
robbers). The action of the play eventually moves to Oran which, as
Cisneros explains, was captured by human strategy as well as divine
dispensation. In this context the narrator tells of the miraculous
attack of the birds pecking out the eyes of the Moors, as well as of
the appearance of a cross in the sky, and the stalling of the sun to
lengthen the day and allow the Spaniards to complete their victory.
The Cardinal's religious fervour provides material for another
comic scene. While praying rapturously, he is elevated from the
ground.

Giropa (joining in his prayer): Father, thanks be to God, thanks

be to God — but where are you going in this fashion?
Cisneros: What is this you are saying, brother? What are you

doing?
Giropa: I'm holding on to your belt to go with you. We're

already two and a half yards off the ground.
Cisneros: What are you talking about?
Giropa: It's as I say. Your Excellency. I am telling Your

Charity.
Cisneros: Are you dreaming?
Giropa: I would say so, if I weren't so hungry. But when I'm

hungry I can't sleep.

Although Cisneros' actions and attitudes supply material for hu-
morous scenes, he himself is not the butt of the humour, but is de-
picted as a man of honour and principle, frustrated and impeded by
smaller minds. The play is more romance than historical drama, and
the audience is asked to suspend belief and enter into the imaginary
action on stage, but Cisneros remains substantially the historical fig-
ure we know: the man of God, the defender of the faith, the patriot,
the conquerer of Oran.

No less flattering is the portrait emerging from a group of books
in which we find Cisneros' career compared with that of Cardinal
Richelieu, chief minister to Louis XIII. The earliest such comparison
appeared some fifty years after Richelieu's death in Marsollier's His-
toire de ministere du Cardinal Ximenez (Toulouse, 1694). In the auth-
or's opinion, "there are parallels between their character, their for-
tune, their policies, their maxims, their enterprises, their successes.
Both were magnanimous and had a character that was exalted, proud,

The Image of the Cardinal 113

impenetrable, and naturally grand. Their emotions complemented
their character. They were noble, intrepid, capable of undertaking
the most difficult tasks." Both men were patrons on a grand scale:
"They both fostered the sciences, the arts, and men of letters. This,
no less than their actions, contributed to the reputation they acquired
so that even today they are regarded the greatest men that France
and Spain has ever brought forth." There were, however, these dif-
ferences: Cisneros had something in his manner "that occasionally
degenerated into rudeness," whereas Richelieu was polite and refined
and knew how to accommodate himself to any persons or circum-
stances. On the other hand, Cisneros was incorruptible, a man of
integrity, who loved his people — "a rare, yet necessary quality, in
those who want to govern" (avertissement, n. p.)

A decade later, I'abbe Richard published Parallele du Cardinal Xi-
menes, Premier Ministre d'Espagne, etdu Cardinal de Richelieu, Premier
Ministre de France (Rotterdam, 1705). He concentrated on the differ-
ences between the two statesmen. Religion was the basis for Cis-
neros' decisions and governed his conduct. This could not be said of
Richelieu, who acted purely from political motives. Cisneros lived a
chaste life and had no dealings with women, whereas Richelieu was
not scrupulous in his conduct. According to Richard, Cisneros was
respected, Richelieu feared. "If Richelieu surpassed Cardinal Ximenes
in politics, Cardinal Ximenes was more famous for his piety. . . .
Every day in France one encountered satires aimed at the actions of
Cardinal Richelieu, whereas in Spain . . . one can read the application
made for the canonization of Ximenes. . . . Richelieu has always been
regarded as a statesman who subordinated religion to politics; Xime-
nes as a great prelate, who as governor of the Spanish realm, based
his decision, not on politics, but on piety and religion" (211-12).

The similarities and discrepancies between the two statesmen
remained a fascination with biographers. The subject is discussed in
the concluding chapter of the standard nineteenth-century biography
by Carl Joseph Hefele, a Catholic theologian at the University of
Tubingen. The book, entitled Der Kardinal Ximenes und die kirch-
lichen Zustdnde Spaniens am Ende des 15. undAnfange des 16. Jahrhun-
derts (Cardinal Ximenes and the Conditions of the Church in Spain
at the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century)
was first published in 1851, went through a number of editions, and
was translated into French (1856), English (1860), and Spanish (1869,

114 The Image of the Cardinal

1879). Hefele focuses his comparison between Cisneros and Richelieu
on three aspects: life, policies, and character. He dramatizes the
events after the two men's return from their respective journeys to
Rome: Richelieu, who had already been elevated to a bishopric, was
welcomed back with honours; Cisneros was "thrown into prison by
his bishop" {Ximenez, 536). Both left their diocese, one seeking se-
clusion, the other success in the world. Hefele notes that Cisneros
advanced steadily in his career, whereas Richelieu suffered temporary
reverses but triumphed over adversity in the end. Both received the
cardinalate in recognition of their services to the crown, but while
Richelieu actively pursued power, Cisneros accepted responsibility
reluctantly. He states that "Cisneros forgave those who wanted to
cast him down and did not avenge personal insults; Richelieu, by
contrast, had his enemies executed and spilled the blood of practically
everyone who opposed him or plotted against him" (ibid., 540). Like
earlier biographers, Hefele is not an unbiased observer, but uses
Richelieu as a dark foil, against which Cisneros' qualities shine more
brightly. He perpetuates the melodramatic story of Charles' letter
reaching Cisneros' house on the eve of his death. He observes that
neither minister was cherished by his sovereign, that both were kept
for their usefulness, but "Louis showed outward respect and consid-
eration for his minister and visited him repeatedly when he fell ill, so
that Richelieu almost literally died in the arms of his sovereign,
whereas Charles avoided meeting Cisneros after landing in Spain, and
insulted this meritorious man on his deathbed, even signing his
dismissal" (ibid., 541). In keeping with the saintly portrait of Cis-
neros is the assertion that "Richelieu was always looking for an ad-
vantage in the misfortunes of his neighbours — Cisneros knew
nothing of such arts" (ibid., 546). More perceptive is Hefele's obser-
vation that both cardinals combined genius with industry. Hefele
furthermore agreed with Marsollier that both Cisneros and Richelieu
showed an unshakeable will in the execution of their plans. He is
also correct in pointing out that Cisneros served capable and energet-
ic rulers, whereas Richelieu's king was weak and left him correspond-
ingly more room for maneuvering. In their religious observances,
finally, they adopted different standards: Richelieu acted like a "re-
spectable man of the world, Cisneros like a saintly ascete" (ibid., 549).
Although the comparisons with Richelieu are ahistorical and, in
the case of Marsollier and Richard, exercises in rhetoric rather than

The Image of the Cardinal 115

historiography, they are indicative of a general perception. They
reflect the heroic image of Cardinal Cisneros, which was already well
established at the turn of the seventeenth century. They continue to
train the spotlight on Cisneros' moral qualities, but also represent a
slight shift in emphasis from the image of a saintly man to that of a
man loyal to God and King.

Turning to the twentieth century, I have already mentioned in
my preface the dearth of modern English literature on Cisneros. In
Spanish literature, by contrast, the cardinal has always attracted and
continues to receive a great deal of scholarly attention. Numerous
books and articles have appeared in the last twenty years, culminat-
ing in Jose Garcia Oro's painstakingly researched biography El Car-
denal Cisneros: vida y empresos (Madrid, 1992/93). In many of these
works the Cardinal retains a saintly aura. It is telling that Garcia
Oro accepts the account of Alvar Gomez de Castro with complacen-
cy. Gomez has painted a masterly portrait, he says. "One may study
some facet more closely, clarify some points or obscure circumstanc-
es .. . but one always has the impression that the outline of his per-
sonality remains basically as depicted by Gomez de Castro in his
richly coloured pages" {Cisneros I: 493). To the present day, then, the
Cardinal is accorded by his biographers an unusual measure of con-
sideration. They appear to be reluctant to explore the darker recesses
of his life or, if they do, fail to include his flaws in a general reckon-
ing. The lone exception is L. P. Harvey {Islamic Spain, 1250-1500
[Chicago, 1990]), whose account of Cisneros' attitude to Muslims
bristles with indignation, and who calls the brutal treatment they
received at his hands "utterly indefensible" (331).

On balance, the Cardinal appears strong-minded, principled, ener-
getic and, like his famous contemporary Thomas More, a "man for
all seasons". Stepping from the threshold of the Middle Ages, Cis-
neros cannot be called a trailblazer; he did, however, march in the
vanguard of the political and cultural forces shaping the Renaissance.
His promotion from homo novus to the position of trusted advisor of
monarchs was characteristic of a trend in the political organization of
early modern Europe. Renaissance rulers typically consolidated their
sovereign power by passing over the landed aristocracy in favour of
individuals who were tied to them by personal loyalty and would act
as their instruments of power. Cisneros clearly believed in the virtue
of a centralized government, and as regent used a pragmatic mixture

116 The Image of the Cardinal

of dictatorial moves and strategic retreats to maintain the prerogative
of the crown wherever possible. This included a religious policy pro-
moting national interests and based on the ideal of "one faith, one
king". Thus Cisneros played a supportive role in the efforts of the
Spanish monarchs to transform their realm from a feudal into a sov-
ereign territorial state — a development that carried the day in the
Renaissance.

As a patron of learning, he recognized the importance of the
newly developed art of printing and promoted textual criticism,
which underpins the transformation from manuscript to print cul-
ture. The University of Alcala continued the scholastic curriculum
(as did all new foundations in the sixteenth century), but also includ-
ed studies in the three biblical languages. It was one of the earliest
institutions to incorporate them into the regular curriculum. Anto-
nio Alvar Ezquerra, author of the most recent study of Cisneros'
foundation, offers this enthusiastic assessment:

"Instruction at the new University of Alcala de Henares dif-
fered in many points from that given at Salamanca, its principal
rival. The reason is this: It did not routinely adopt the Univer-
sity of Paris as its model . . . Cisneros, with absolute conviction,
had, from the inception of the University, planned a new and
accurate edition of the Bible based on the premises of humanis-
tic philology, although it was a humanism closer to the spirit of
Erasmus than to the paganizing Italians. Consequently, the
study of theology at Alcala, enriched by the studia humanitatis,
was free of scholastic dogmatism and enlivened by the spirit of
tolerance [!] ... Perhaps there was no great substantive differ-
ence between the instruction offered at Salamanca and Alcala,
but there was in spirit. It is significant in this sense that the Cis-
. nerian university contacted Erasmus and Vives, inviting them to
come and teach there. In effect, the university preferred the meth-
od of rhetorical exegesis, a humanistic heritage, to the method
of dogmatic exposition in the scholastic tradition. ("Le mo-
dele," 245-6)

As a church leader Cisneros likewise foreshadowed developments
that were soon to dominate Europe: the call for spiritual renewal and
for a new approach to theology, focusing on biblical studies. Antici-
pating a movement that gathered momentum during the Counter-

The Image of the Cardinal 117

Reformation, he called for pastoral responsibility, for a sober life re-
flecting the vows of chastity and poverty, and for the study of bib-
lical texts in their original languages. His support for the Beatas,
which strikes the modern reader as bordering on superstition, should
be regarded in the context of the pious yearning which characterized
pre-Reformation Europe. It found expression in the mysticism of
German Schwdrmer and Italian spirituali. Spain, more than any other
country, provided a fertile ground for religious enthusiasm. Although
some of the Spanish alumhrados and dejados were accused of hetero-
doxy because they appeared to challenge the hierarchy of the church,
mysticism also attracted distinguished Catholic reformers like Loyola
and Teresa of Avila. Rooted in medieval sensitivities, mystics re-
mained a feature of the religious landscape in the Counter-Reforma-
tion. Both in his mystical leanings and in the intolerance Cisneros
showed toward non-Christians, he manifested the cultural bias of his
time. His "crusade" in North Africa and his inquisitorial proceedings
in Granada leave modern readers with a feeling of distaste. His mili-
tant spirit especially, and his desire to lay down his life for God and
win a martyr's crown, which was heroic in the eyes of his early bio-
graphers, appears today as a facet of cultural and religious imperialism.
In spite of such flaws, Cisneros was remarkable for his versatility.
In his recent biography, Cruz Martinez Esteruelas describes Cisneros
as excelling in the three principal aspects of human nature: he was a
homo religiosus, homo politicus, and homo oeconomicus, that is, a spiri-
tual, political, and practical man [Cisneros, 178-9). It cannot be de-
nied that Cisneros played a pivotal role in Spanish history. If there is
a perception today that he does not belong to the select circle of
those who changed the course of history, it is because his political
ideas, his zeal for reform, and his interest in print culture and philol-
ogy, progressive at the time, became mainstream within a decade of
his death. Thus time caught up with Cisneros. His thought merged
with the Zeitgeist and became invisible in the broad currents of the
Renaissance.

Literature Cited

Abbreviations

ACA

AHN

AIA

Allen

Alvar Esquerra

Alvar Esquerra,
"Le modele"

Andres

Bataillon
Bentley

Bergenroth

CMH

Cart. Sec.

Archivo de la Corona de Aragon (Barcelona) (now
titled in Catalan Arxiu de la Corona de Arago)

Archivo Historico Nacional (Madrid)

Archivo Ibero Americano

P. S. Allen, ed., Erasmi Epistolae, 12 vols. (Oxford,
1906-58)

A. Alvar Esquerra, "Alvar Gomez de Castro y la
historiografia latina," in El Erasmismo en Espana,
ed. M. Revuelta Sanudo et al. (Santander, 1986),
247-64

"Le modele universitaire d'Alcala de Henares dans
la premiere moitie du XVIe siecle," in Les origines
du College de France (1500-1560), ed. M. Fumaroli
(Paris, 1998), 209-57

M. Andres, La teologia espanola en el siglo XVI, vol.
2 (Madrid, 1977)

M. Bataillon, Erasmo y Espana (Mexico, 1966)

J. Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ (Princeton
1983)

G. A. Bergenroth, ed.. Calendar of Letters and
Papers . . . England and Spain (London, 1862)

The New Cambridge Modem History, ed. D. Hay
(first ed., Cambridge, 1957), vol. 1

Cartas de los secretarios del Cardenal . . . Ximenez de
Cisneros durante su regencia . . . , ed. V. de la Fuente
(Madrid, 1875)

120

Literature Cited

Cart. Xim.

Cedillo

Constituciones

CWE
Davies

Diaz-Plaja

Elliott, Spain

Elliott, World

Escandell Bonet

Garcia Oro,
Cisneros

Garcia Oro,
Reforma

Gilly

Gomez, De
rebus gestis

Hefele,

Ximenez

Harvey

Cartas del Cardenal . . . Ximenez de Cisneros . . . , ed.
P. Gayangos y V. de la Fuente (Madrid, 1867)

Conde de Cedillo, El Cardenal Cisneros, gobemador
del Reino, 3 vols. (Madrid, 1921-28)

R. Gonzales Navarro, ed. and trans., Universidad
Complutense. Constituciones originales cisnerianas
(Alcala, 1984)

71)6 Collected Works of Erasmus (Toronto, 1974- )

R. Trevor Davies, The Golden Century of Spain:
1501-1621 (London, 1937)

F. Diaz-Plaja, ed., Historia de Espana en sus docu-
mentos (Madrid, 1988)

J. H. Elliott, Imperial Spain 1469-1716 (New York,
1963)

J. H. Elliott, The Hispanic World: Civilisation and
Empire (London, 1991)

B. Escandell Bonet, Estudios Cisnerianos (Alcala,
1990)

J. Garcia Oro, El Cardenal Cisneros: Vida y empre-
sas, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1992-3)

J. Garcia Oro, Cisneros y la reforma del clero espa-
nol en tiempo de los Reyes Catolicos (Madrid, 1971)

C. Gilly, "Una obra desconocida de Nebrija con-
tra Erasmo y Reuchlin," in El Erasmismo en Es-
pana, ed. M. Revuelta Saiiudo et al. (Santander,
1986), 195-218

A. Gomez, De rebus gestis a Francisco Ximeni Cis-
nerio, Spanish trans. J. Oroz Reta (Madrid, 1984)

C. von Hefele, 57;e Life and Times of Cardinal Xi-
menez, trans. J. C. Dalton (2nd ed., London, 1885)

L. P. Harvey, Islamic Spain: 1250-1500 (Chicago,
1990)

Literature Cited

121

Hillgarth

Historical
Catalogue

History of
the Indies

Kamen, Spain

Kamen,
Inquisition

Hamilton A. Hamilton, Heresy and Mysticism in Sixteenth-

Century Spain: The alumbrados (Toronto, 1992)

J. Hillgarth, The Spanish Kingdoms 1250-1516
(Oxford, 1978) vol. 2

Historical Catalogue of the Printed Editions of Holy
Scripture in the Library of the British and Foreign
Bible Society, eds. T. Darlow and H. Moule (New
York, 1963) vol. 2, # 1517

B, de las Casas, History of the Indies, trans. A. Col-
lard (New York, 1971)

H. Kamen, Spain 1469-1714: A Society in Conflict
(London, 1983)

H. Kamen, Inquisition and Society in Spain (Bloom-
ington, 1985)

Ladero Quesada M. Ladero Quesada, Los mudejares de Castilla en
tiempo de Isabel (Valladolid, 1969)

Liss P. Liss, Isabel the Queen: Life and Times (New

York, 1992)

Mariejol J. H. Mariejol, The Spain of Ferdinand and Isabella,

trans. B. Keen (New Brunswick, 1961)

Marineo Siculo L. Marineo Siculo, Epistolarum Familiarium libri
(Valladolid, 1514)

Martinez Esteruelas C. Martinez Esteruelas, Cisneros, de presidiario
a rey (Barcelona, 1992)

Martire P. Martire, Opus epistolarum (Alcala, 1530);

Spanish version by J. Lopez de Toro in Docu-
mentos ineditos para la historia de Espana (Madrid
1953-57), vols. 9-12. In the text I quote by the
number of the letter ("Ep").

Menendez Pidal R. Menendez Pidal, "The Significance of the
Reign of Isabella the Catholic According to Her
Contemporaries," in Spain in the Fifteenth Century,
ed. R. Highfield (London, 1972), 380-404

122

Literature Cited

Merriman R. B. Merriman, The Rise of the Spanish Empire

(New York, 1962), vol. 2

Meseguer J, Meseguer Fernandez, "Documentos historicos

diversos. Ill: El Cardenal Cisneros inquisidor gen-
erz\," AIA: 43 (1983): 95-194

Mexia, Cronica Pero Mexia in Colleccion de Cronicas Espanolas,
ed. J. de Mata Carriazo, vol. 7 (Madrid, 1945)

Moorman J. Moorman, The History of the Franciscan Order

(Oxford, 1968)

Nebrija, A. Nebrija, Apologia cum quibusdam Sacrae Scrip-

Apologia turae locis non vulgariter expositis (n.l., 1516)

Novum D. Erasmus, ed.. Novum Instrumentum (Basel, 1516);

Instrumentum called Novum Testamentum in later editions

Olin J. Olin, Catholic Reformation From Cardinal Xi-

menes to the Council of Trent, 1495-1563 (New-
York, 1990)

Perez J. Perez, ed., La hora de Cisneros (Madrid, 1995)

Prescott Wm. Prescott, History of the Reign of Ferdinand

and Isabella, (first published 1883; 10th ed., New
York, 1951)

Quintano Quintano Ripolles, Historia de Alcald de Henares

(Alcala, 1973)

Quintanilla P. Quintanilla, Archetypo de virtudes. Espejo de

prelados (Palermo, 1653)

RABM A. de la Torre, "La Universidad de Alcala. Datos

para su historia," Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y
Museos 21 (1909): 48-71, 261-85, 405-33

Retana, L. Fernandez de Retana, Cisneros y su siglo, 2 vols.

Cisneros (Madrid, 1929)

Rodriguez Sanchez A. Rodriguez Sanchez, Historia de Espana (Mad-
rid, 1991)

Sainz Rodriguez P. Sainz Rodriguez, La siembra mistica del Cardenal
Cisneros y las reformas en la iglesia (Madrid, 1979)

Literature Cited

123

Rummel E. Rummel, The Humanist-Scholastic Debate in the

Renaissance and Reformation (Cambridge, Mass.,
1995)

Telechea J.-I. Telechea, "La reforma religiosa," in Perez, La

Hora de Cisneros, 43-53

Tibesar A. S. Tibesar, "The Franciscan Province of the

Holy Cross of Espanola," The Americas 13 (1957):
377-89

Vallejo J. de Vallejo, Memorial de la vida de Fray Francisco

Jimenez de Cisneros, ed. A. de la Torre y del Cerro
(Madrid, 1913)

Wadding L. Wadding, Annales Minorum ah origine Ordinis

ad annum 1340, 25 vols. (Rome, 1731-1886)

Witness Witness: Writings of Bartolome de las Casas, ed. G.

Sanderlin, foreword by D. Gutierrez (New York,
1992)

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Jiménez de Cisneros : on the threshold of Spain's Golden Age"

See other formats