Women and Children First: Court Ceremonial during Carlos II’s Minority, 1665–1675

Abstract

The Spanish Habsburg court underwent a substantial restructuring when Carlos II (b. 1661, r. 1665–1700) became king of Spain just before his fourth birthday (17 September 1665). In his testament, Philip IV (r. 1621–1665) required that the child-king remain under the jurisdiction of his mother, Queen Mariana of Austria (1634–1696), during his minority. This well-established tradition in Habsburg child-rearing practices had never been applied to a child who was already king; it meant that for nearly a decade, there was no king’s household in the court. This article investigates the impact of Philip IV’s testamentary mandate on court ceremonial and the strategies that Mariana, queen regent and king’s mother, implemented. The unprecedented situation marks an important moment in the history of the queen’s household; it is crucial to understand how Carlos II exercised the office of king during his minority, and critical to reinterpret the early years of his rule as an emancipated king.

Notes

1 The blending of etiquette traditions gave way to the system of multiple royal houses in the Spanish court; see José Eloy Hortal Muñoz and Félix Labrador Arroyo, ‘Introducción’, in José Eloy Hortal Muñoz and Félix Labrador Arroyo (eds), La Casa de Borgoña: La Casa del Rey de España (Leuven, 2014), pp. 15-19, p. 16. On Spanish-Burgundian ceremonial and structure, see John H. Elliott, ‘The Court of the Spanish Habsburgs: A Peculiar Institution?’ reprinted in John H. Elliott, Spain and its World: 1500–1700. Selected Essays (New Haven and London, 1989), pp. 142-61, p. 142 and below. The first ordinances for the queen’s household were adopted for Queen Anna of Austria in 1570, see Félix Labrador Arroyo, ‘From Castile to Burgundy: The Evolution of the Queens’ Households during the Sixteenth Century’, in Anne J. Cruz and Maria Galli Stampino (eds), Early Modern Habsburg Women: Transnational Contexts, Cultural Conflicts, Dynastic Continuities (Farnham, 2013), pp. 119-48, pp. 137-38.

2 Martha Hoffman, Raised to Rule: Educating Royalty and the Court of the Spanish Habsburgs, 1601–1634 (Baton Rouge, 2011).

3 Hoffman, Raised to Rule, pp. 1-2.

4 On the queen’s household, Dálmiro de Válgoma, Norma y ceremonia de las reinas de la Casa de Austria (Madrid, 1954); José Martínez Millán and Maria Paula Marçal Lourenço (eds), Las relaciones discretas entre las Monarquías Hispana y Portuguesa: Las casas de las reinas (siglos XV–XIX), 3 vols (Madrid, 2008); Magdalena S. Sánchez, The Empress, the Queen and the Nun: Women and Power at the Court of Philip III of Spain (Baltimore, 1998), particularly chapter 2, pp. 36-60.

5 On the prestige of the office of camarera mayor and a perspective on the political role of the queen’s household for the women that were part of it, María Victoria López-Cordón Cortezo, ‘Entre damas anda el juego: las camareras mayores de Palacio en la edad moderna’, Cuadernos de Historia Moderna. Anejos: Monarquía y corte en la España moderna 2 (2003), pp. 123-152.

6 On the queen’s household role in Habsburg children’s education, Hoffman Raised to Rule, pp. 29-38. For an example of the type of influence an aya of a prince could have (in this case Inés de Zúñiga, countess of Olivares), see Alejandra Franganillo, ‘The Education of an Heir to the Throne: Isabel of Borbón and Her Influence on Prince Baltasar Carlos’, in Grace E. Coolidge (ed.), The Formation of the Child in Early Modern Spain (Aldershot, UK; Burlington, VT, 2014), 143-63, p. 147.

7 Hoffman, Raised to Rule, p. 49-51.

8 Antonio Domínguez Ortíz (ed.), Testamento de Felipe IV. Edición facsímil (Madrid, 1982), pp. 40-67.

9 Tutorship or guardianship of the king was the main source of power for queen regents; see Katherine Crawford, Perilous Performances: Gender and Regency in Early Modern France (Cambridge, MA and London, 2004), p. 3.

10 Domínguez Ortíz, Testamento de Felipe IV, pp. 52-3.

11 Philip IV vaguely stated, ‘when the appropriate age requires it’, Domínguez Ortíz, Testamento de Felipe IV, pp. 52-3.

12 Archivo del Palacio Real, Reinados, Carlos II (hereafter APR, RCII), caja (hereafter c.) 92, expediente (hereafter exp.) 3.

13 ‘Reformas desde 1665 a 1575’, APR, Sección Administrativa (hereafter Adm.) legajo (herafter leg.) 5647.

14 Guillén Ramón de Moncada, the 4^th marquis of Aytona (1615–1670), devised the reforms as his papers in the Archivo Ducal de Medinaceli (discussed below) indicate.

15 In his seminal essay on Burgundian ceremonial, Werner Paravicini has challenged the notion that it became the model for Europe. Werner Paravicini, ‘The Court of the Dukes of Burgundy: A Model for Europe?’, in Ronald G. Asch and Adolf M. Birke (eds), Princes, Patronage and the Nobility: The Court at the Beginning of the Modern Age, c.1450–1650 (London, 1991), pp. 69-102, pp. 69, 99. Yet, the introduction of Burgundian etiquette in Spain, which began with the advent of the Habsburgs in 1517, was made official when Charles V instituted the household of his heir, Philip II, following the Burgundian etiquette in 1548. John H. Elliott, ‘Philip IV of Spain: Prisoner of Ceremony’, in A. G. Dickens (ed.), The Courts of Europe: Politics, Patronage, and Royalty,1400–1800 (New York, 1977), pp. 169-89, p. 174.

16 Although the Spanish Habsburg court was characterized by a system of multiple royal houses, the Burgundian ceremonial dominated, Hortal Muñoz and Labrador Arroyo, ‘Introducción’, p. 16. However, so strong was the association of this ceremonial with the Spanish Habsburgs that when re-introduced in Brussels by the Archdukes Albert and Isabela, it was considered foreign; see, Dries Raeymaekers, One Foot in the Palace: The Habsburg Court of Brussels and the Politics of Access in the Reign of Albert and Isabella, 1598–1621 (Leuven, 2013), p. 46; and Paravicini, ‘Court of the Dukes of Burgundy’, p. 72.

17 Revisionist studies on many aspects of his reign have been growing substantially since the publication of the special journal issue in anticipation of the three-hundredth anniversary of Carlos II’s death in the prestigious Spanish journal, Studia histórica. Historia Moderna (1999), and the seminal essay by Luis Ribot, ‘Carlos II: El centenario olvidado’, Studia histórica. Historia moderna 20 (1999), pp. 19-44. The court has generally received less attention, with the notable exception of Luis Ribot (ed.), Carlos II: El rey y su entorno cortesano (Madrid, 2009).

18 Duke of Medina de las Torres to Mariana of Austria, 18 September 1665, copy in ‘Consultas, memoriales e informes del IV marques de Aytona, Caballerizo mayor de la Reyna, a S[u] M[agestad] Mariana de Austria’, Archivo Ducal Medinaceli (hereafter ADM), Sección Histórica (hereafter Hist.), leg. 68, ramo 22.

19 Medina de las Torres to Mariana, and Mariana to Medina de las Torres, 18 September 1665, in ‘Consultas, memoriales e informes del IV marques de Aytona’, ADM, Hist., leg. 68, ramo 22.

20 Medina de las Torres to Mariana, and Mariana to Medina de las Torres, 18 September 1665, in ‘Consultas, memoriales e informes del IV marques de Aytona’, ADM Hist. leg. 68, ramo 22. Mariana’s measure was taken on the marquis of Aytona’s recommendation, who was at the time the caballerizo mayor; he acquired the additional post of Queen’s mayordomo mayor in October 1667. His role is discussed below.

21 Surrendering of the keys marked changes of regime whether the king had died or not, as the 1618 episode known as the ‘revolution of the keys’ and the transition from Philip III to Philip IV’s reigns illustrate; see John H. Elliott, The Count-Duke of Olivares: The Statesman in an Age of Decline (New Haven, 1986), pp. 36-40. The retired nature of Spanish kingship increased the significance of possessing keys to the King’s Chamber. On the significance of access, see Raeymaekers, One Foot in the Palace, pp. 47-8; on specific significance of the keys in the court of Brussels, see Dries Raeymaekers and Sebastiaan Derks, ‘Introduction: Repertoires of Access in Princely Courts’, in Dries Raeymaekers and Sebastiaan Derks (eds), The Key to Power?: The Culture of Access in Princely Courts, 1400–1750 (Leiden and London, 2016), pp. 1-15, pp. 1-2. For the French court, Jonathan Spangler, ‘Holders of the Keys: The Grand Chamberlain, the Grand Equerry and Monopolies of Access at the Early Modern French Court’, in The Key to Power?, pp. 155-77. In the Spanish court, the sumiller de corps always had the privilege of possessing keys; some but not all gentlemen of the chamber did as well.

22 Paravicini mentions the gap between office and function, noting that many servants performed tasks for which nobles had the title. Paravicini, ‘Court of the Dukes of Burgundy’, p. 73.

23 Montalto to Mariana, 8 January 1666, APR, RCII, c. 83, exp. 1.

24 Mariana to Montalto, response to his memo of 8 January 1666, APR, RCII, c. 83, exp. 1.

25 Medina de las Torres, Council of State deliberation 15 September 1667, Archivo Histórico Nacional (hereafter AHN), Estado (hereafter E.), leg. 674, exp. 18.

26 There were approximately thirty-six dukes, sixteen marquises, fifteen counts, and five Italian princes with the privilege of grandeza or grandeeship during Carlos II’s reign, APR, Hist., c.73, exp. 1. There were twelve councils of government, with the Council of State and the Council of Castile the most prestigious. The upper aristocracy usually served in the Council of State and as viceroys, generals, and ambassadors; they held the top positions in the court hierarchy such as the King’s Chamber as well as executive offices in both households.

27 Feliciano Barrios, La gobernación de la Monarquía de España: Consejos, juntas y secretarios de la administración de la corte (1556–1700) (Madrid, 2015).

28 Aside from possessing substantial political power in their own territories, they were considered cousins of the king and the queen, addressed by them as such in correspondence. They were allowed to keep their heads covered in the presence of the monarch, a coveted privilege that singled them out from the rest of the subjects.

29 On the importance of these court offices for validos/ministers, see James M. Boyden, The Courtier and the King: Ruy Gomez de Silva, Philip II, and the Court of Spain (Berkeley, 1995); Antonio Feros, Kingship and Favoritism in the Spain of Philip III of Spain, 1598–1621 (Cambridge, 2000); John H. Elliott, The Count-Duke of Olivares: The Statesman in an Age of Decline (New Haven and London, 1986); and John H. Elliott and L. W. B. Brockliss (eds), The World of the Favourite (New Haven and London, 1999).

30 Perhaps in anticipation of this situation, titled nobles from the kingdom of Aragon presented several requests to be given access to the Queen’s household beginning in 1664, APR, Hist., c. 55, exp. 7. I have not come across similar requests from other kingdoms. It is significant perhaps that besides Castile (the recognized principal kingdom of the Spanish composite monarchy), the Kingdom of Aragon was the only one other to have representation in the Junta de Gobierno or Regency Council formed for the regency; Domínguez Ortíz, Testamento de Felipe IV, pp. 43-5.

31 Aytona’s recommendations included allocating to the mayordomo mayor of the Queen’s household administrative responsibility over what remained of the king’s household, except the stables. Thus the office now combined the administrative responsibilities of the mayordomo mayor of the two households and the sumiller de corps; it was the highest masculine office in court ceremonial; Aytona to Mariana, n/d September 1665, ADM, Histórica, leg. 68, ramo 22. This point is confirmed by Fernando Álvarez de Toledo, 6^th duke of Alba in the Council of State deliberation discussed below. At the time he was the mayordomo mayor of the Queen’s household, but because of his premature death, he served for only six months. He was succeeded in the post by Aytona, ‘La Reyna N[uest]ra S[eño]ra Dios la guarde, fue serbida en 8 de octubre de este año [1667] hazer me merced del puesto de Mayordomo Mayor suyo que Vacó por muerte del Sr. Duque de Alba’, ADM, Hist., leg. 69, ramo 1.

32 Válgoma, Norma y ceremonia, p. 33.

33 Azafatas, or ladies of the wardrobe, were the women in charge of assisting the royal children in intimate tasks such as bathing and dressing; Hoffman, Raised to Rule, pp. 35-6.

34 Even before the regency, the duke of Montalto lodged several complaints in 1664 to the King, complaining about the women of Queen Mariana’s household giving ‘oral orders for purchases, which were supposed to be approved by him as the mayordomo mayor’. Montalto to Philip IV, 28 February, 13 and 16 June, and 7 August 1664, APR, Hist., c. 55, exp. 1. During the regency, Mariana disciplined a treasurer for not complying with the orders of these women in 1668; Mariana to Aytona, 20 November 1668, ADM, Hist., leg. 69.

35 Although change was not impossible, it was very difficult; see John H. Elliott, ‘Philip IV: Prisoner of Ceremony’, p. 175.

36 Baldueza’s file in APR, Personal, c. 1099, exp. 29; Los Velez’s file, Personal, c. 1084, exp. 11.

37 On Baldueza and Los Vélez and their political role in Mariana’s court, see Laura Oliván Santaliestra, ‘La dama, el aya y la camarera. Perfiles políticos de tres mujeres de la Casa de Mariana de Austria’, in Las Relaciones Discretas, vol. 2, pp. 1301-55, pp. 1310-1, 1318-19; on the post of camerera mayor in a longitudinal perspective, López-Cordón Cortezo, ‘Entre damas anda el juego’, pp. 127-8.

38 Biblioteca Nacional de España, Madrid (hereafter BNE), ms. 5742, fols 373r-4r. The Regency Council or Junta de Gobierno was the special ad hoc committee established as a consultative organ of government at Mariana’s disposal during her governorship; see Cristina Hermosa Espeso, ‘El Testamento de Felipe IV y la Junta de Gobierno de la minoridad de Carlos II. Apuntes para su interpretación’, Erasmo: Revista de Historia Bajo-Medieval y Moderna 1 (2014), pp. 102-20; and María del Carmen Sevilla González, ‘La junta de Gobierno de la minoridad del rey Carlos II’, in José Antonio Escudero (ed.), Los validos (Madrid, 2006), pp. 583-616.

39 Caspar Netscher’s painting depicting the ‘Reception of the Dutch ambassador Hieronymus van Beverningk by the Spanish queen-regent Maria-Anna of Austria on 2 March 1671,’ Rijksmuseum, SK-A-4128. http://hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.4716.

40 Ángel Sánchez Rivero, Viaje de Cosme III por España (1668–1669). Madrid y su provincia (Madrid, 1927), pp. 31-2.

41 This was noted by the Imperial ambassador in Madrid, Franz Eusebius, count of Pötting, see Miguel Nieto Nuño (ed.), Diario del Conde de Pötting, Embajador del Sacro Imperio en Madrid (1664–1674), 2 vols (Madrid, 1990), vol. 1, p. 156. On the importance of knighting ceremonies for Spanish kingship, Teófilo F. Ruíz, ‘Unsacred Monarchy: The Kings of Castile in the Late Middle Ages’, in Sean Wilentz (ed.), Rites of Power: Symbolism, Ritual, and Politics since the Middle Ages (Philadelphia, 1985), pp. 109-44, p. 124.

42 The report was produced by the marquis of Aytona in consultation with other officials, ‘Puntos para la entrada del embaxador de Moscovia (Pyotr Ivanovich Potemkin)’, 1667, ADM, leg. 69, ramo 7. On the Russian embassy to Madrid in 1668 and its novelty, see Francisco Fernández Izquierdo, ‘Las embajadas Rusas a la corte de Carlos II’, Studia Histórica. Historia Moderna 22 (2000), pp. 75-107, pp. 78-91.

43 Sánchez Rivero, Viaje de Cosme III por España, pp. 31-2.

44 Aytona became mayordomo mayor in October 1667, after designing and implementing the ‘reforms of 1666’, ADM, Hist., leg. 68, ramo 22.

45 Aytona to Mariana, n/d September, 16 October 1665, and 2 February 1666, ADM, Hist., leg. 68 and 70.

46 Aytona to Mariana, n/d September, ADM, Hist., leg. 68, ramo 22.

47 Mariana’s royal decree, 25 September 1665, APR, RCII, c. 118, exp. 4.

48 BNE, ms. 5742, fol. 371v.

49 BNE, ms. 5742, fol. 371v.

50 BNE, ms. 5742, fols 371r-2r.

51 BNE, ms. 5742, fols 371r-2r.

52 John H. Elliott, ‘Philip IV’, pp. 174-5.

53 These exchanges were recorded in the Council of State deliberations that took place on 7 and 15 September 1667, AHN, E., leg. 674; for the placements of kings and queens respectively on the left and right; the spatial arrangement was based on scripture and the concept that ‘Christ sat on the right of his father’, see David Davis, ‘The Body Politic of Spanish Habsburg Queens’, in Las Relaciones Discretas, vol. 3, pp. 1469-536, p.1471.

54 Mariana to Baldueza, Mariana to Los Vélez, summer 1667, AHN, E. leg. 674, exp. 18. We do not have all the original communications between the Queen and the two women, but the memoranda exchanged between the parties were partially transcribed and summarized by the secretary and it formed part of the consultation by the Council of State. This was standard procedure for all deliberations of Councils of Government and allowed members of the councils and the King to keep track of all pertinent information of each matter under discussion.

55 Baldueza to Mariana, 30 June 1667; Los Vélez to Mariana, 2 August 1667; Council of State deliberation, 15 September 1667, AHN, E., leg. 674, exp. 18.

56 Baldueza to Mariana, 7 September 1667, AHN, E., leg. 674 exp. 18.

57 Gabriel Maura, Carlos II y su corte. Ensayo de Reconstrucción biográfica, 2 vols (Madrid, 1911 and 1915), vol. 1, pp. 289-91.

58 José Martínez Millán, ‘La corte de la monarquía hispánica’, Studia histórica. Historia Moderna 28 (2006), pp.17-61, p. 50; Félix Labrador Arroyo, ‘La formación de las Etiquetas Generales de Palacio en tiempos de Felipe IV: La Junta de Etiquetas, reformas y cambios en la Casa Real’, in La Casa de Borgoña, pp. 99-128, pp. 102-16.

59 ‘Copia de las etiquetas generales que habian de observar los Criados de Su Magestad en el uso y ejercicio de sus oficios, y en las diversas funciones á que asisten a las Personas Reales’, APR, Hist., c. 51, exp. 1. These were recorded in the books on 11 February 1651 after a royal decree from 22 May 1647; they were republished 31 August 1676 (during Carlos II’s rule as an adult).

60 ‘Mejor lugar’ in APR, Hist., c. 51, exp. 1, f. 3r.

61 José Manuel Barbeito, El Alcázar de Madrid (Madrid, 1992), pp. 127-74; Virginia Tovar Martín, ‘Contribución a la obra de Juan Gómez de Mora’, Anales del Instituto de Estudios Madrileños 15 (1978), 59-72.

62 See for example, ‘Planta del acompañamiento de sus magestades saliendo el Rey n[uest]ro S[eño]r a cavallo y la Reyna n[uest]ra S[eñor]a En coche’, APR, Hist., c. 51, exp. 1, folio 246r.

63 Council of State deliberation, 15 September 1667, AHN, E., leg. 674, exp. 18.

64 He self-identified as a former menino in the Council of State deliberation, AHN, E., leg. 674, exp. 18.

65 On previous dukes of Alba serving as mayordomos mayores for Philip II, Philip III, and Philip IV, see Elliott, The Count-Duke of Olivares, p. 396.

66 Medina de las Torres’s opinion, Council of State deliberation, 15 September 1667, AHN, E., leg. 674, exp. 18.

67 AHN, E., leg. 674, exp. 18.

68 Medina de las Torres’s opinion, Council of State deliberation, 15 September 1667, AHN, E., leg. 674, exp. 18.

69 Duke of Alba’s opinion, after his colleagues had spoken, 15 September 1667, AHN, E., leg. 674, exp. 18.

70 APR, Hist., c. 51, exp. 1, f. 3r.

71 Grandees were permitted to cover their heads in the presence of the king by right but how and when they did so was highly regulated. For example, some could keep their hats on without waiting for the king to giving them permission (and some, such as the marquis of Aytona, did not exercise this prerogative as a show of respect); others, however, had to wait for the king to give them permission. Other distinctions between the group included the timing: some could cover their heads before speaking to the king, others once they started speaking, a third group after they addressed the king and returned to their place. On the three groups of grandees, see Elliott, ‘Philip IV’, p. 174. Philip IV also gave permission to the grandees to cover their heads, uttering the traditional order ‘cubríos’. Mariana and Carlos did so as well. On Carlos II’s performance of the rituals associated with kingship as a child and a young adolescent, see Silvia Z. Mitchell, ‘Growing Up Carlos II: Political Childhood in the Court of the Spanish Habsburgs’, in The Formation of the Child, pp. 189-206, p. 195.

72 Sánchez Rivero, Viaje de Cosme III por España, pp. 31-2.

73 The first knighting ceremony took place on 7 July 1669, Nieto Nuño, Diario del Conde de Pötting, vol. 2, p. 46.

74 Sánchez Rivero, Viaje de Cosme III por España, pp. 31-2.

75 Elliott, ‘Philip IV’, 174-5.

76 Ruiz, ‘Unsacred Monarchy’, p. 124.

77 ‘Planta del acompañamiento de sus magestades saliendo el Rey n[uest]ro S[eño]r a cavallo y la Reyna n[uest]ra S[eñor]a En coche’, APR, Hist., c. 51, exp. 1, folio 246r.

78 Nieto Nuño, Diario del Conde de Pötting, vol. 2, pp. 234, 304.

79 Nieto Nuño, Diario del Conde de Pötting, vol. 1, p. 149.

80 APR, RCII, c. 92, exp. 1.

81 APR, RCII, c. 92, exp. 3.

82 Franganillo, ‘Education of an Heir’, p. 148.

83 Fanny Cosandey, ‘Puissance maternelle et pouvoir politique. La régence des reines mères’, Clio. Histoire, femmes et sociétés 21 (2005) http://clio.revues.org/1447, paragraph 27.

84 Silvia Z. Mitchell, ‘Habsburg Motherhood: The Power of Queen Mariana of Austria, Mother and Regent for Carlos II of Spain’, in Early Modern Habsburg Women, pp. 175-96, pp. 175-80.

85 Hoffman, Raised to Rule, p. 50.

86 ‘Meninos incorporated into the household of the queen from the moment that Carlos inherited. [Gentiles hombres de la cámara y meninos de la reina],’ APR, Adm, leg. 5648.

87 José Rufino Novo, ‘La Casa real durante la regencia de una reina: Mariana de Austria’, in Las relaciones discretas, vol. 1, pp. 483-547, p. 510.

88 APR, Adm., leg. 5648; Rufino Novo, ‘La Casa real durante la regencia’, pp. 510-1.

89 Hoffman, Raised to Rule, p. 50.

90 APR, Adm., leg. 5648; Rufino Novo, ‘La Casa real durante la regencia’, p. 511.

91 On the dance and the hiring of musicians, ADM, Hist., leg. 69; Nieto Nuño, Diario del Conde de Pötting, vol. 2, p. 164.

92 APR, Adm., leg. 5648; Rufino Novo, ‘La Casa real durante la regencia’, pp. 504-9.

93 Jeffrey Schrader, La Virgen de Atocha: Los Austrias y las imágines milagrosas (Madrid, 2006), p. 17.

94 Nieto Nuño, Diario del Conde de Pötting, vol. 1, pp. 393-4.

95 The importance of children for the lineage’s survival included girls as well as boys. Truly, the Habsburgs and their aristocratic subjects had much in common. Grace E. Coolidge, ‘Investing in the Lineage: Children in the Early Modern Spanish Nobility, 1350–1750’, in The Formation of the Child, pp. 223-47, p. 223.

96 On the spatial and institutional organization of the Spanish Habsburg court, Elliott, ‘The Court of the Spanish Habsburgs’, p. 145.

97 Nadine Akkerman and Birgit Houben (eds), The Politics of Female Households: Ladies-in-Waiting across Early Modern Europe (Leiden, 2013).

98 María Victoria López-Cordón Cortezo, ‘La evolución de las damas entre los siglos XVII y XVIII,’ in Las relaciones discretas, vol. 2, pp 1357-97, pp. 1358-9.

99 Sánchez, The Empress, the Queen and the Nun.

100 Mitchell, ‘Growing Up’, p. 204.

101 José Eloy Hortal Muñoz and Félix Labrador Arroyo, ‘Introducción’, p. 16.

102 Elliott, ‘Philip IV’, p. 174. Although the queen’s household preserved Castilian traditions, over time there was a blending of the two etiquette traditions; see, Labrador Arroyo, ‘From Castile to Burgundy’, p. 119-20.

103 Labrador Arroyo, ‘From Castile to Burgundy’, pp. 123-5.

104 John H. Elliott, The Revolt of the Catalans: A Study in the Decline of Spain, 1598–1640 (Cambridge, 1963), p. 10 and Idem, ‘A Europe of Composite Monarchies’, Past & Present 137 (1992), pp. 48-71, pp. 59-60, 64-65, 66-67.

105 Isabel Clara Eugenia (1566–1633) was heiress from 1568 to 1571; she became the titular ruler of the Spanish Netherlands; Anne of Austria (1601–1666) was heiress from birth until 1605; Maria Theresa of Austria (1638–1683) was the heiress to the Spanish throne from 1647 to 1657; Margaret of Austria (1651–1673), was the heiress from 1665 until her death in 1673; she passed on her succession rights to her daughter, Maria Antonia of Austria, who was the heiress to the Spanish throne from 1673 until her death in 1692. These women’s contested succession rights of course led to the War of Spanish Succession.

106 Theresa Earenfight has made a similar point for the medieval Crown of Aragon, when discussing the long lieutenancies (a form of regency or a governorship) of Maria of Castile (1401–1458) from 1420–3 and again 1432–58. See, Theresa Earenfight, ‘Absent Kings: Queens as Political Partners in the Medieval Crown of Aragon’, in Theresa Earenfight (ed.), Queenship and Political Power in Medieval and Early Modern Spain (Aldershot, UK; Burlington, VT, 2005), pp. 33-51.

107 For the notion of what is Burgundian about the Burgundian ceremonial, see Paravicini, ‘Court of the Dukes of Burgundy’, pp. 86-9; for the Spanish-Burgundian ceremonial associated with kingship, Elliott, ‘Philip IV’, p. 173, particularly the famous episode when the count-duke of Olivares kissed the royal chamber-pot after the King scolded him one afternoon. Also see the lucid discussion of the Spanish-Burgundian ceremonial by Raeymaekers, One Foot in the Palace, pp. 41-51.

108 Mitchell, ‘Habsburg Motherhood’, p. 181.

109 Crawford, Perilous Performances, pp. 60, 79, 81, 103-4.

110 Antonio Álvarez-Ossorio Alvariño, ‘El favor real. Liberalidad del Príncipe y jerarquía de la república (1665–1700)’, in Cesare Mozzarelli (ed.), Repubblica e virtú; pensiero politico e Monarchia Cattolica fra XVI e XVII secolo (Rome, 1995), pp. 393-453 pp. 409-10.

111 Despite the excellent revisionist histories on Carlos II’s reign, the figures of don Juan José and Valenzuela, or Nithard, for that matter, continue to take center stage. See, for example, Albrecht Graf von Kalnein, Juan José de Austria en la España de Carlos II: historia de una regencia, translated by Carlos Potayo (Lleida, 2001); Henry Kamen, Spain in the Later Seventeenth Century, 1665–1700 (London, 1980). In the last decade there has been a renewed interest in understanding these events from alternative perspectives, Laura Oliván Santaliestra, ‘Mariana de Austria en la encrucijada política del siglo XVII’, Ph.D. diss., Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2006. The recent International Seminar (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 27-28 February 2018) exclusively dedicated to Mariana, as well as the future volume based on the papers, indicates that the revisionist wave of studies continues unabated.

112 Álvarez-Ossorio Alvariño, ‘El favor real’, pp. 410-12; Idem, ‘Virtud coronada: Carlos II y la piedad de la Casa de Austria’, in P. Fernández Albaladejo, José Martínez Millán and V. Pinto Crespo (eds), Política, religión e inquisición en la España moderna. Homenaje a Joaquín Pérez Villanueva (Madrid, 1996), pp. 29-57, p. 31.

113 Elliott, ‘Philip IV’, p. 175.

114 Mitchell, ‘Habsburg Motherhood’, pp. 184-6.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Silvia Z. Mitchell

Silvia Z. Mitchell received her Ph.D. in History in 2013 from the University of Miami, where she held the McKnight Doctoral Fellowship. She is currently Assistant Professor of early modern European history at Purdue University, where she teaches courses on early modern Spain, women and gender, queens, and the military and diplomatic history of Europe. Her monograph on the regency of Queen Mariana of Austria, Queen, Mother, and Stateswoman: Mariana of Austria and the Government of Spain, is forthcoming with Penn State University Press in 2019.