I am indebted to Derek Lomax and Teo Ruiz who read and commented on an earlier version of this paper; Leonard Boyle and María del Carmen Guzmán for their assistance in securing copies of documents from Archivio Segreto Vaticano and Archivo Historico Nacional, Madrid respectively; Ramón Gonzalvez, canon archivist of Toledo Cathedral, regarding Guadalupe material in his custody; and John Crook for help with note 52.

¹ Madrid, Archivo Histórico Nacional (hereafter cited as AHN), Ms 48B, fo. 6v: printed from this source, with modernised spelling, by Rubio, G., Historia de N. Señora de Guadalupe, Barcelona 1926, 13–22, at p. 20Google Scholar.

² Rubio does not reproduce these marginal notes, asserting that on fo. 6v to be ‘muy posterior’ to the text (p. 24). In fact, two different hands have been at work in the margins, of which the earlier (Hand a) appears to be more or less contemporary with the text hand (e.g. fo. 6v). At fo. 8r, at the description of the items discovered with the image, after the word ‘asentada’, Hand a adds (marg.) ‘e la carta que fuera puesta con ella’, followed by (Hand b): ‘la qual carta fue llevada al rey don A. xj’: all of this in corroboration of what is stated in the text (fo. 8v): that ‘el rrey Don Alfonso que de suso vos avemos dicho (e) ouo un escripto que fallaron con la ymajen de Santa Maria e mando que fuesse trasladado ensus coronicas rreales’. Cf. Rubio, op. cit., 24, and below, n. 6.

³ The text perpetrates a major chronological blunder at the outset, making King Reccesuinth (649–72) and Eugenius, metropolitan of Toledo, the contemporaries of Gregory the Great - rather than Reccared and Eufimius respectively: Rubio, op. cit., 13.

⁴ According to an only partly legible addition (Hand a) ‘ffalaron hi a heremita e un sepulcrode marmor’ dedicated to (?) ‘San Fulgencio’ (fo. 5V). Diego de Ecija (fl. c. 1480) has the holy clerics discover ‘una como ermita pequeria, las paredes hechas de piedra seca y cubierta de corchas y mal reparada’ (that is, the church built centuries later, according to the Legend, after the discovery of the image) and, within it, ‘una como sepultura de piedra de mármol’ in which they placed relics of St Fulgencius, together with their other treasures: Libra de la invencidn de esta Santa Imogen de Guadalupe;y de la ereccidny fundación de este Monasterio; y de algunas cosas particulares y vidas de algunos religiosos de él [1514], ed. A. Barrado Manzano, Cáceres 1953, 41.

⁵ The pastor in the Legend is unnamed. His identification as Gil Cordero (i.e. ‘lamb’), or Gil de Santa Maria is stated, on questionable evidence, in Ecija, op. cit., 49, 55.

⁶ Ibid., 59. Unaccountably, no one thought to retain a copy of the written record found with the image1 before handing it over to the king - though the lenedores of Guadalupe in the 1340s and thereafter were sedulous in securing multiple copies of royal privileges in favour of the church. And, regrettably, it did not find its way into the royal chronicles: ‘Entrando estas cosas en los manos de los Príncipes se hunden abueltas de tantos cuydados, y de tantos papeles’, as José de Sigüenza, the seventeenth-century historian of the Jeronimite Order observed - before proceeding to provide what purported to be a description (‘mostraua el lenguage, y la forma de las letras Góticas’) of what he acknowledged ‘sola…bastaua para hazer fe del principio y origen del caso’: Historia de la Orden de San Jerónimo, 1 [1600], 2nd edn (Nueva Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, 8), Madrid 1907, 79b, 81 a. Indeed, the contemporary Crónica de D. Alfonso el Onceno (Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, 66), Madrid 1953 (hereafter cited as Crónica) is silent on the subject of Guadalupe, even in its extended account of the Battle of the Salado where Pope Benedict xn is recorded as having praised Alfonso xi as a worthy successor of King David and other Old Testament rulers, but where there is no mention of the Virgin’s contribution to the victory (325fF, esp. 330b): an omission which raises interesting questions in view of the function of the author, Fernán Sánchez de Valladolid, as Alfonso’s historiographer. Cf. D. Catalán, ‘La historiografia de Alfonso xi a la luz de nuevos textos: prioridad de la Crónica respecto a la Gran Crónica’, Anuario de Estudios Medievales, ii (1965), 291; Salvador de Moxó, ‘El auge de la nobleza urbana de Castilla y su proyección en el ambito administrativo y rural a comienzos de la Baja Edad Media’, Boletín de la R. Academia de la Historia (hereafter cited as BRAH), clxxviii (1981), 432ff. The so-called Gran Crónica de Alfonso XI, however - which depends on the Crónica for most of its information - does record the king’s visit to Guadalupe after the battle, ‘a dar gragias a Nuestra Señora, en quien este noble rrey don Alonso auie gran deboçion e a quien el se auie rrecomendado quando yva a pelear con los moros…e offersçio muchas cosas; e mando que se escriuiese en su Coronica como Nuestra Señora auie aparesçido en aquel lugar al vaquero e se auia hallado alii soterrada su santa ymagen e se auia fundado e fecho alii aquella sancta yglesia de Guadalupe donde Nuestra Señora hazia tantos milagros e como el auia dado a aquella yglessia el termino que tenie de las tierras de Talauera e de Trugillo…’: cap. 335 (ed. D. Catalán, Madrid 1977, ii. 449): a passage for which the editor can find no source (Ibid., i. 206). ‘La argumentation “filológica”‘points to a date in the late 1370s for the compilation of the Gran Crónica, though on other grounds an earlier date may be suspected: Ibid., i. 238ff.

⁷ M. I. Perez de Tudela y Velasco, ‘Alfonso xi y el Santuario de Santa María de Guadalupe’, in Quesada, M. A. Ladero (ed.), En la España Medieval, iii. Estudios en memoria del Prof. D. Salvador de Moxó, Madrid 1982, 285Google Scholar. The author is not surprised by Alfonso’s desire to associate the Virgin with his work as a reconquering monarch: he was ‘hombre piadoso’, she states; ‘asi lo define S. de Moxó, sin duda el mejor conocedor del personaje’. Moxó’s authority in turn proves to be a generalised reference to the Crónica, in which the king’s ‘sentimientos religiosos’ and ‘respeto filial a la Iglesia’ are found to be expressed: Salvador de Moxó, ‘La sociedad política bajo Alfonso xi’, Cuademos de Historia, vi (1975). 192. The characterisation of Alfonso xi as pious is one so challenging as to merit serious consideration - but not on this evidence.

⁸ Somalo, J. Revuelta, Los Jerónimos. Una orden religiosa nacida en Guadalajara, Guadalajara 1982, 171Google Scholar, following Rubio, Historia, 26. The phrase quoted from a privilege of Enrique n in 1373 referring to exemptions enjoyed by Guadalupe in the reigns of Alfonso xi and ‘de los otros reyes onde nos venimos’ is a commonplace and can hardly bear the interpretation here placed upon it.

⁹ Pérez de Tudela, ‘Alfonso xi y el Santuario’, vigorously rejects the notion that ‘los intereses economicos de la corona’ might have been served by promotion of Guadalupe; rather the contrary. But there is no necessary conflict between such interests, whatever they were, and ‘algún estimulo…de orden espiritual’, whatever that was.

¹⁰ Ecija, Libra de la invención, 59 (Dec. 1340). AHN, Clero, 392/2 (Aug. 1348), is more circumstantial: ‘et donde era pequena hermita ffiziemos aquella creger e obrar en grant eglesia de muro de piedra’. His gifts had included ‘rentas giertas’, ‘tierras e terminos de lauor’, as well as ‘otras donatories de ornamientos e joyas dela nuestra camara e otras grandes mergedes muitas’.

¹¹ Pérez de Tudela, op. cit., 275; Ecija, op. cit., 54. Thus, most recently, J. C. Vizuete Mendoza, ‘Santa María de Guadalupe: de priorato a monasteriojeronimo. 1340–1450’, unpublished doctoral thesis, Univ. Autónoma, Madrid, 1984, i. 29. Rubio’s reference (p. 24) to a document of 25 December 1330 in which Alfonso ‘encomienda al Cardenal D. Pedro Gomez Barroso la tenencia de Guadalupe’ is perhaps a confusion with a royal privilege of that day in the year 1340. Cf. Ecija, op. cit., 59–61.

¹² Rubio, Historia, 32. Cardenal M. González Martin, ‘Santa Maria de Guadalupe en el corazón de la historia católica de España. Carta Pastoral con motivo del cincuenta aniversario de la Coronatión Canónica de la I mage n de la Virgen de Guadalupe’, Boletín Oficial de la Archiodiócesis de Toledo, ix-x (1978), 9, refers to a document of 25 December (again) 1328 in which Alfonso ‘dotó a Guadalupe con rentas, incorporándolas a su patrimonio’. (Revuelta, Los Jerónimos, 172, misreading the cardinal’s pastoral, takes this to be a carta puebla designed to attract settlers to the area.) The document referred to is not to be found in any part of the Guadalupe archive, which was dispersed in the 1820s, nor in the archive of Toledo Cathedral.

¹³ Rubio, Historia, 25. Revuelta, op. cit., 172, appears to be mistaken in alleging a second document (of 1329) indicating that by then Guadalupe was ‘algo de cierta importancia’. Cf. L. de la Cuadra, Catálogo-inventario de los documenlos del Monasterio de Guadalupe, Madrid ‘973. n o. 3.

¹⁴ Ibid., no. 43. Thus also Vizuete, ‘Santa Maria de Guadalupe’, ii. 52.

¹⁵ Jean XXII. Lettres communes, ed. G. Mollat, Paris 1904–37, nos. 25905, 28390. The fact that ‘Stephanus Lubucensis’ was not confirmed in the see of Lebus until 17 October 1326 (Ibid., no. 26767) does not affect this dating. There was no place for the ‘elect’ in this company: cf. Ibid., nos. 57213, 57374, for ‘Bonifacius Sulcitanensis’ (of Sulcis). Further to what is stated in C. Eubel, Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi, I, Münster 1923, 154, Thaddeus of Caffa was in office by April 1326 (cf. Mollat, op. cit., no. 25023). ‘Nicolaus Neupatensis’ (Lepanto; Patradjik?) has proved unidentifiable.

¹⁶ For this date see Molénat, J. P., ‘En Espagne à la fin du xive siècle. La naissance de Puente del Arzobispo: une relecture’, Le Moyen Âge, lxxxvi (1980), 243Google Scholar; L. V. Díaz Martín, ‘La consolidateón de Guadalupe bajo Pedro I’, En la España Medieval, ii. 315. The latter author places the foundation of Guadalupe, by Alfonso xi, in the year 1340; idem, ‘La Mesta y el monasterio de Guadalupe. Un problema jurisdiccional a mediados del siglo xiv’, Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español (hereafter cited as AHDE), xlviii (1978), 519.

¹⁷ ‘…seu qui ultimis voluntatibus dicte ecclesie quicquam suarum legaverint facultatem, necnon qui ad fabricam, luminaria, ornamenta et alia dicte ecclesie necessaria manus porrexerint adiutrices’: below, 304. Both as to content and to context this is a far cry from the ten maravedis bequest made at Trujillo in June 1327: Revuelta, Los Jerdnimos, 172.

¹⁸ Below, 294–5.

¹⁹ Mollat, Jean XXII, nos. 26125, 26266, 26270–1, 26185–6: petitions for benefices for royal clerks.

²⁰ Ibid., no. 26388. At the time of his appointment as cardinal in December 1328 Pedro was at Toledo: Crónica, 213b.

²¹ The earliest unimpeachable evidence for Barroso’s association with Guadalupe hitherto presented dates from 1337: Ecija, Libra de la inuención, 54. Rubio (p. 29) surmised that Pedro Garcia, custodian of Guadalupe in 1329, was ‘procurador quizá del Cardenal Barroso’. With Revuelta (p. 172) the ‘quiza’ has disappeared. Cf. below, 296.

²² Crónica, 199a; Moxó, ‘La sociedad poh’tica’, 276ff; idem, ‘La promotion politica y social de los “letrados” en la corte de Alfonso xi’, Hispania, xxxv (1975), 5ff. For Moxo’s definition of letrado see ‘La sociedad poh’tica’, 286: ‘entendiendo aquel termino de “letrados” no exclusivamente como hombre versado en Derecho - aunque esto resultara importante - sino en el sentido - amplio y preciso a la vez - de persona que posee una determinada formación que la conciencia social de la época considera apropiada para participar en la función pública, como hombre singularmente experto en orden a la colaboración en las tareas de gobierno’; and, in almost identical terms, ‘La promoción’, 7. It remains to be determined what was new and distinctive about Moxó’s letrado. As to Barroso, there is record of his presence at Bologna in August 1316; Heredia, V. Beltran de, Cartulario de la Universidad de Salamanca (1218–1600), Salamanca 1970, 147, 630Google Scholar.

²³ Crónica, loc. cit. For Alfonso’s request in March 1327 for the appointment of three Castilian cardinals and other supplications which the proctor of Jaume 11 of Aragon regarded as ‘indecentes’, see Finke, H., ‘Nachträge und Ergänzungen zu den Acta Aragonensia’, Spanische Forschungtn der Görresgesellschaft, iv (1933), 475Google Scholar. Barroso was not the first Castilian prelate to make the grade, as Moxó states (‘La promoción’, 9); he had his thirteenth-century predecessors.

²⁴ Ecija, Libra de la inventión, 54; above, n. 10.

²⁵ ‘Sepades que don Pedro cardenal de Espanna nos envio a decir que toviesemos por bien de dar termino ala iglesia de Santa Maria de Guadalupe que el agora tiene, sennaladamente de los terminos de Truyiello y de Talavera e que el que fara por que esta eglesia fuesse nuestro padronadgo’ (to Fernan Perez de Monroy): AHN, Clero, 391/19; cf. Ecija, op. cit., 54.

²⁶ Cortes de los antiguos reinos de León y de Castillo, ed. R. Academia de la Historia, 1, Madrid 1861, 372. Rubio envisages the young king, now unleashed, ‘en algunas de sus frecuentes correrias por Extremadura’ shortly afterwards discovering ‘los humildes muros del Santuario’ (p. 29).

²⁷ Moxó, ‘La sociedad poli’tica’, 281, 286. Cf. R.-H. Bautier, ‘Diplomatique et histoire politique: ce que la critique diplomatique nous apprend sur la personnalité de Philippe le Bel’, Revue Historique, cclix (1978), 3ff.

²⁸ Crónica, 209a.

²⁹ P. Chaplais (ed.), The War of Saint-Sardos (1323–1325). Gascon correspondence and diplomatic documents, Camden Society 3rd ser., LXXXVII, London 1954, 214–17.

³⁰ ‘… estos omnes que tienen el Rey en poder fasen quanto pueden por le consentir que (…). E sy por aventura como es moco e non vee nin oye nin sabe faser sino que ellos mandan’ (D.Juan Manuel to Jaume H, April 1327); ‘Otrosi algunas cosas que uos entendiades que no son seruicio del dicho Rey de Castiella ni su pro e todo esto era por malos conseylleros qui en esto lo metian et porque entendiades que seria su seruicio de desuiarlo desto’ (Jaume n to D.Juan Manuel, June 1327): Soler, A. Giménez, Don Juan Manuel. Biografiay estudio critico, Zaragoza 1932, 539, 544Google Scholar. Two years before, Jaume’s son, the archbishop of Toledo, had reported that Alfonso was proposing certain extreme measures against the ecclesiastical estate, ‘ductus vel pocius seductus consilio aliquorum’: Finke, H., Acta Aragonensia, ii, Berlin-Leipzig 1908, 866Google Scholar.

³¹ Libra de las armas, in J. M. Blecua (ed.), D. Juan Manuel. Obras Completas, Madrid 1981, i. 134 (1. 452), 137 (1. 530); Libra enfenido, c. 10: Consejeros ‘deuen ser segundo la hedad de los sennores; ca de que el sennor pasa de quinze annos fasta en xxv, deuen ser los consejeros de una guisa, et delos xxv adelante deuen ser de otra. Ca los que son consejeros fasta los xxv non deuen ser quales quier que el sennor quiera tomar’ (Ibid., 168–9). Both works date from the years 1335–7.

³⁸ Crónica, 218b. Not even the chronicler can put a brave face on it. Especially when compared with Alfonso’s full-dress coronation, the wedding is a distinctly low-key affair. The celebrant was a mere priest, Johannes Symeonis of the diocese of Lisbon. ‘Adhibitis omnibus solemnitatibus que consueverunt in talibus adhiberi’, he was subsequently absolved for his part in the proceedings: Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Registrum Vaticanum (hereafter R.V.), 91, ep. 2691 (Mollat, Jean XXII, no. 45970). Cf. H. Flórez, Memorial de las reynas catholicas, 3rd edn, Madrid 1790, ii. 605ff; J. E. Martinez Ferrando, Jaime II de Aragón. Su vida familiar, Barcelona 1948, i. 138–9.

³³ Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, 541–2.

³⁴ R.V. 89, ep. 916 (Mollat, op. cit., no. 44344), 14 Feb. 1329.

³⁴ Raynaldus, Annales ecclesiastici, Bar-Ie-Duc 1872, xxiv. 430 (5 March 1329), addressed to Bishop Juan of Oviedo, one of Alfonso’s confidants (Moxó, ‘La promoción’, 9ff.). The letter is not traceable in R.V., and its date presents difficulties. Cf. Eubel, Hierarchia Catholica, i. 382. For Alfonso’s ordinary preoccupations at the Curia see P. A. Linehan, ‘The Church, the economy and the reconquista in early fourteenth-century Castile’, Revista Española de Teología, xliii (1983), 295ff.

³⁶ Idem, ‘The politics of piety: aspects of the Castilian monarchy from Alfonso x to Alfonso XI’, forthcoming in Revista Canadiense. de Estudios Hispánicos (Alfonso el Sabio centenary volume).

³⁷ Flórez, Memorias, ii. 616.

³⁸ R.V. 89, ep. 916 (‘infra unius anni spatium’).

³⁹ Giménez Soler, Don Juan Manuel, 541. Cf. his pleasure at the prospect of a Castilian-Aragonese marriage in Aug. 1325 as being ‘a servicio de Dios e a buen estado de toda Espanya’: Martinez Ferrando, Jaime II, ii. 313.

⁴⁰ See V. de Lafuente, Vida de la Virgen Maria con la historia de su culto en España, Barcelona 1879, ii. 226–35; W. A. Christian, Jr, Apparitions in Late Medieval and Renaissance Spain, Princeton 1981, passim.

⁴¹ Toledo, Archivo Capitular, doc. 1.12.B. 1.8; J. Rodríguez Marquina, ‘Linajes Mozárabes de Toledo en los siglos xii y xiii’, in Genealogias mozárabes, Toledo 1981, i. 61–4; Casanova, E., ‘Visita di un papa avignonese a suoi cardinali’, Archivio della R. Societé di Storia Patria, xxii (1899), 379–81Google Scholar.

⁴² R.V. 89, ep. 23 (Mollat, Jean XXII, no. 42802).

⁴³ As note 41 (13 Feb. 1337).

⁴⁴ Pansier, P., ‘Histoire du monistère de Ste-Praxède d’Avignon (1348–1587)’, Annales d’Avignon el du Comtat Venaissin, iv (1916), 76ffGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁵ Mansilla, D., La documentatión pontificia de Honorio III (1216–1227), Rome 1965, nos. 30, 133Google Scholar (Toledo’s claim to ‘spirituale ius’ over Plasencia). Cf. idem, Iglesia castellano-leonesa y Curia Romano en los tiempos del rey San Fernando, Madrid 1945, 107, 130Google Scholar; González, J., Repobtacion de Castillo la Nucva, Madrid 1975, i, 322ffGoogle Scholar. Above, 285.

⁴⁶ P. A. Linehan, ‘The Spanish Church revisited: the episcopal gravamina of 1279’, in Spanish Church and Society 1150–1300, London 1983, IX. 142; idem, ‘Politics of piety’. As noted by Vazquez de Parga (L. Vázquez de Parga et al., Las peregrinaciones a Santiago de Compostela, Madrid 1948, i. 79), the European wars of the fourteenth century exacerbated Compostela’s difficulties; but they did not create them.

⁴⁷ R. Avezou, ‘U n Prince aragonais archeveque de Tolède au XI Ve siècle. D. J u a n de Aragon y Anjou’, Bulletin Hispanique (hereafter cited as BH), xxxii (1930), 358–61.

⁴⁸ Mollat, Jean XXII, nos. 53366 (April 1331), 55456, 55463 (Oct. 1331). Cf. Beltrán de Heredia, Cartulario, 147–9.

⁴⁹ Dykmans, M., Le Cérémonial papal de la fin du Moyen Age à la Renaissance, ii, Brussels-Rome 1981, 73 n. 251Google Scholar; Mollat, Jean XXII, no. 51369 (Oct. 1330).

⁵⁰ Ibid., nos. 40225 (Jan. 1328), 45589 (July 1329).

⁵¹ Ecija, Libro de la invención, 60.

⁵² R.V. 120, ep. 60. (Cf. the misleading description in J.-M. Vidal, Benotl XII. Lettres communes et curiales, Paris 1903–11, no. 162, where Plasencia is mistaken for Palencia.) ‘Dum ad personam… Cum itaque sicut accepimus ecclesia Sancte Marie de Guadalup que in Tholetane ac Placentine diocesum confinibus consistere noscitur, per obitum ultimi eiusdem ecclesie rectoris qui extra Romanam curiam obiit vacet ad presens, Nos attendentes quod sicut habet communis assertio ecclesia ipsa, pro eo quod venerabiles fratres nostri… archiepiscopus Toletanus et episcopus Placentinus asserentes uterque videlicet ipsorum ecclesiam ipsam in sua diocesi fore sitam super hoc contendere dinoscuntur, graviter est collapsa; et propterea volentes eidem ecclesie et (sic) utilis gubernatoris fulciatur auxilio salubriter providere et considerantes attente quod ipsa ecclesia per eiusdem cardinalis providentiam circumspectam reformari poterit utiliter et salubriter gubernari et per hoc etiam opportunitatibus ipsius cardinalis pro manitentibus sibi expensarum oneribus levius subportandum aliqualiter subveniri, discretioni vestre per apostolica scripta mandamus quatinus vos vel duo aut unus vestrum per vos vel alium seu alios eandem ecclesiam etiam si ei cura imineat animarum, si, ut premittitur, vacat et tempore date presentium non sit in ea specialiter alicui ius quesitum, eidem Petro cardinali cum omnibus iuribus et pertinentiis suis auctoritate nostra conferre et assignare curetis, inducentes eum vel procuratorem suum eius nomine in corporali possessione ecclesie ac iurium et pertinentium predictorum…sibique facientes de ipsius ecclesie fructibus, redditibus, proventibus, iuribus et obventibus universis integre responderi. Volumus autem quod per collationem huiusmodi auctoritate presentiunij ut premittitur, faciendam de ecclesia supradicta archiepiscopo et episcopo memoratis vel Tholetane seu Placentine ecclesiis aut alicui eorundem super eadem ecclesia tarn in proprietate quam in possessione nullum preiudicium generari… Dat. Avinione iiij non. junii anno primo.’

⁵³ Rubio, Historia, 32.

⁵⁴ The Guadalupe tradition is that the first’ tenedor’ of the sanctuary, acting on behalf of Barroso, was Pedro Garcia, who died c. 1330 and was succeeded by Toribio Fernindez de Mena, who survived until c. 1367: Revuelta, Los Jerónimos, 172, 177.

⁵⁵ The earliest document at Toledo Cathedral regarding the affairs of Guadalupe appears to be V. 12.E.1. 1, dated 21 July 1382, and cited from an eighteenth-century copy in Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid, in Revuelta, op. cit., 179 n. 559.

⁵⁶ AHN, Sellos, 101/5 (La Cuadra, Catálogo-Inventario, no. 42). At the end of the dating clause appear the words ‘Item domini episcopi Cartaginensis’, which presumably were intended to be inserted in the list of those for whom prayers are invited: perhaps in recognition of Barroso’s association with the see of Cartagena. (Cf. Kelly, H. A., Canon Law and the Archpriest of Hita, Binghamton, N.Y. 1984, 116ffGoogle Scholar.)

⁵⁷ Díaz Martin,’ La consolidación’, 320, 334; Revuelta, op. cit., 175–6. It may be noted that the 1350 indulgence permits those reciting the Ave Maria at Guadalupe to do so ‘flexis genibus secundum consuetudinem terre seu patrie’ - a possibility not envisaged twenty-four years earlier (cf. below, 304). Cf. Highfield, J. R. L., ‘The Jeronimites in Spain, their patrons and success’, this Journal, xxxiv (1983), 513–33Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ Above, p. 286.

⁵⁹ Sicroff, A. A., ‘The Jeronymite monastery of Guadalupe in 14th and 15th century Spain’, in Hornik, M. P. (ed.), Collected Studies in Honour of Americo Castro’s Eightieth Tear, Oxford 1965, 398Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ Regarding which see J. Montes Bardo,’ Iconografia de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe’, in Doctrina y piedad mariana en la Españo del siglo XVII, Salamanca 1979 (= Estudios Marianos, xliv), 265–78, esp. pp. 274–6.

⁶¹ Christian, Apparitions, 123.

⁶² Tit. 10, ley 12: in Bonet, J. A. Arias (ed.), Alfonso X el Sabio, Primera Partida (manuscrito Add. 20787 del British Museum), Valladolid 1975, 277–8Google Scholar.

⁶³ Tit. 4, ley 63 (Arias Bonet, 58).

⁶⁴ La Sainteté en Occident aux demiers siècles du Moyen Age d’aprés Us procès de canonisation et les documents hagiographiques, Rome 1981, 7iff, 160; cf. P. Linehan, ‘Sanctity and society in later medieval Europe’, this Journal, xxxiv (1983), 101. (For the date of the text of the Primera Partida in British Library MS Add. 20787, see J. R. Craddock, ‘La cronología de las obras legislativas de Alfonso x el Sabio’, AHDE, li (1981), 386ff.)

⁶⁵ Vauchez, op. cit., 93ff. Cf. Linehan, ‘Politics of piety’. In the late 1330s Don Juan Manuel, Fernando m’s great-grandson, describes the latter as ‘saneto rey’: Libra de las armas, ed. Blecua, i. 138 (1. 574).

⁶⁶ Above, n. 6. The chronicler elsewhere exhibits deep suspicion of the contemporary papacy and takes an extreme imperialist line in his account of John xxn’s dealings with Louis of Bavaria. (This and other issues treated summarily in these pages are discussed more fully in my forthcoming study of Spanish kingship from the sixth century to the fifteenth.)

⁶⁷ Procter, E. S., Alfonso X of Castile, Patron of Literature and Learning, Oxford 1951, 29ffGoogle Scholar; Fontes, J. Torres, ‘El monasterio de San Ginés de la Jara en la Edad Media’, Murgetana, xxv (1965). 39–90. esp. pp. 43, 49Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Young, K., The Drama of the Medieval Church, Oxford 1933, ii. 3ffGoogle Scholar; Donovan, R. B., The Liturgical Drama in Medieval Spain, Toronto 1953, 30ffGoogle Scholar; V. and Turner, E., Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Culture. Anthropological Perspectives, Oxford, 1978, 41Google Scholar; Lafuente, Vida de la Virgen Maria, ii. 96–103, who remarks that to provide an account of all the images of the Virgin allegedly discovered by shepherds in this period would be’ una cosa tan pesada y prolija como inutil’ (p. 98). Cf. Barber, M., ‘The Pastoureaux of 1320’, this Journal, xxxii (1981), 143–66, esp. p. 162Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ ‘Chronique latine inedite des Rois de Castille (1236)’, ed. G. Cirot, BH, xiv (1912), 359, and note; F. Fita,’ Traslación e inventión del cuerpo de S. Ildefonso. Reseña histórica por Gil de Zamora’, BRAH, vi (1885), 60ff. Cf. Acta Sanctorum, ed. Bollandiana, III Januarii, 149ff.

⁷⁰ Cf. Kendrick’s, T. D. account of the discoveries made at Granada in the 1580s and 1590s: Saint James in Spain, London 1960,. 69ffGoogle Scholar.

⁷¹ See Vives, J. Vicens, Manual de hisloria económica de España, 5th edn., Barcelona 1967, 232ffGoogle Scholar; and, for a review of recent literature, Bishko, C. J., ‘Sesenta años después: La Mesta de Julius Klein a la luz de la investigateón subsiguiente’, Historia. Instituciones. Documentos, viii (1981), 18ffGoogle Scholar.

⁷² AHN, MS 48B, fo. 6v. But note that in the Gran Crónica’s account he is still a cowman (‘vaquero’): above, n. 6. Cf. J. L. Martín Martín, ‘Sur les origines et les modalités de la grande propriété du Bas Moyen Age en Estremadure et dans la Transierra de León’, Les Espagnes médiévales. Aspects économiques el sociaux. Mélanges qfferts à J. Gautier Dalché ( = Annales de la Faculté des Lettres et Sciences Humaines de Nice, xlvi (1983)), 8 1–91, esp. pp. 85–7.

⁷³ Díaz Martin, ‘La Mesta’, 510–11, 527–8. Cf. Bishko, C. J., ‘The Castilian as plainsman : the medieval ranching frontier in La Mancha and Extremadura’, in Studies in Medieval Spanish Frontier History, London 1980, iv. 47ffGoogle Scholar.

⁷⁴ For the association (hermandad) formed in 1300, a nd confirmed by the regents in 1315, whereby the inhabitants of Toledo and Talavera bound themselves to eliminate the golfines from the Montes de Toledo, see L. Jimenez de la Llave, ‘Archivo municipal de Talavera de la Reina’, BRAH, xxiv (1894), 195–6; H. C. Lea, A History of the Inquisition of Spain, London 1922, i. 29. A privilege of Fernando rv for Garci Sanchez of Trujillo in September 1305 refers to the latter’s lands at Valdepalacios, subsequently acquired by Guadalupe, as having been ‘en poder de golfines’: AHN, Clero, 396/18 (La Cuadra, Catdlogo-inventario, nos. 2, 134). As Ch.-E. Dufourcq and J. Gautier Dalche remark, populatores had not favoured Extremadura, preferring richer pickings in Andalusia: Histoire iconomique et social: de l'Espagne chrétienne au Moyen Age, Paris 1976, 83–4Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ Klein, J., The Mesta. A study in Spanish economic history 1273–1836, Cambridge, Mass.-London 1920, 89, 188ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷⁶ Above, p. 285.

⁷⁷ Togneri, R. Pastor, ‘La lana en Castilla y León antes de la organizacion de la Mesta’, in Conflictos societiesy estancamicnto econdmico en la Españo medieval, Barcelona 1973, 162ffGoogle Scholar. For the role of the caballeros villanos in these years, see Ruiz, T. F., ‘Expansion et changement: la conquete de Seville et la societe castillane (1248–1350)’, Annalcs-E.S.C, xxxiv (1979), 548–65Google Scholar; idem, ‘The transformation of the Castilian municipalities: the case of Burgos 1248–1350’, Past & Present, lxxvii (1977), 7ff.

⁷⁸ Gregorio, F. Jiménez de, ‘Tres puentes sobre el Tajo en el medievo’, Hispania, xiv (1954), 163–226Google Scholar; Molénat, ‘En Espagne’, 233–49; Revuelta, Los Jerónimos, 179.

⁷⁹ Díaz Martín, ‘La Mesta’, 527–8.

⁸⁰ Villar, M. D. Sánchez, Desde Estella a Sevilla: cuentas de un viaje (1352), Valencia 1962Google Scholar.

⁸¹ Linehan, ‘Politics of piety’; Ruano, E. Benito, La prelacyón ciudadana. Las disputas por la precedencia entre las ciudades de la Corona de Castilla, Toledo 1972, 13–16Google Scholar; above, 285. The significance of Toledo’s possession of the remains of King Wamba (d. 680) was that he was the last Visigothic king untainted by responsibility For the catastrophe of 711; also - in the words of Alfonso x’s privilege for the church of Toledo when Wamba’s remains had been brought there in 1274 - that ‘asossego y puso en buen estado todas sus [i.e. Spain’s] terminos, assi que contienda ninguna no dexo enellos, tanbien enel partimiento de los obispados, como delos otros lugares que deuieron ser partidos, y no lo eran’. The privilege added that Toledo ‘fue en tienpo de los Godos cabeqa de las Espannas do antiguamiente los Emperadores se coronauan’. When Pedro 1 was prevailed upon to confirm this privilege in October 1351 Toledo’s purpose was to assert a claim to be ‘cabeca de Espanna’ then: P. de Alcocer, Hystoria, O description dela Imperial cibdad de Toledo, Toledo 1554 [repr. Madrid 1973], fos. lxxiv-lxxv: M. Castanos y Montijano, ‘Toledo cabeza de Espana’, Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos, xiii (1905), 239; L. Diaz Martin, Itinerario de Pedro I de Castillo.. Estudioy Regesta, Valladolid 1975, no. 245. For Gregory I’S grant of the pallium to Leander in 599 for use within his church (‘ad sola missarum sollemnia utendum’) see Gregorii I papae Registrum epistolarum, 11, ed. L. M. Hartmann, M.G.H., Epistolae 11, Berlin 1899, 218–20; Bonet, J. Marti, Romay las iglesias particulares en la concesidn del palio a los obisposy arzobispos de Oceidenle, afto 513–1143, Barcelona 1976, 26–7Google Scholar. Cf. Ibid., 204–7. Neither in Gregory’s letter to Leander nor amongst his gift of relics to King Reccared (op. cit., 224–5) is there any reference to an image of the Virgin.

⁸² Roderici Ximenii de Rada, De rebus Hispaniae, rv. 1, in F. de Lorenzana (ed.), Patrum Toletanorum quotquot extant Opera, in, Madrid 1793 (re-imp. Valencia 1968), 75; R. Menéndez Pidal (ed.), Primera Crónia General, Madrid 1955, cap. 561. Cf. Barbero, A. and Vigil, M., ‘La historiografia de la época de Alfonso iii’, in Laformación del feudalism) en la Peninsula Ibérica, Barcelona 1978, 275–6Google Scholar. Oppa’s connection with Toledo was not so easily disproved. In the 1270s Gil de Zamora regarded it as certain that he had held both sees ‘simul’, while as late as the 1550s Alcocer was at pains to insist that, although archbishop of Seville, Oppa had been ‘intruso’ at Toledo: Depreconiis Hispanie, ed. M. de Castro y Castro, Madrid 1955, 102; Hystoria, fo. xxxviii.

⁸³ In 1216–17 the archbishop of Braga’s proctor at the papal curia had sought to blacken Toledo’s reputation by recalling ‘quod Opa, quondam archiepiscopus Toletanus…apostavit cedens in sectam Mohabitarum et per eum amissa fuit tota Hyspania et recuperata per Bracarensem’; and in 1465 Enrique iv’s supporters made great play of representing the then archbishop of Toledo, Alonso Carrillo, an opponent of the king, as Oppa redivivus: P. Feige, Die Anfänge desportugiesischen Königtums und seiner Landeskirche: Spanischen Forschungen der Görresgesellschaft, 1. Reihe, xxix (1973), 399; Linehan, ‘Religion and national identity in medieval Spain and Portugal’, in Spanish Church and Society, I, 172; Angus MacKay, ‘Statues, constitutional dramatic ritual, peasant speech, and prophetic vision in fifteenthcentury Castile’, Past & Present (forthcoming). I am grateful to Dr MacKay for allowing me to see the typescript of his remarkable article.

⁸⁴ Libro del consejo, ed. A. Rey, Zaragoza 1962, 71; Moxó, ‘La sociedad poh’tica’, 195, 280–1; idem, Repoblación y sociedad en la España aistiana medieval, Madrid 1979, 11Google Scholar (‘sumamente interesado en bosquejar una teorfa de la realeza’). Cf. Linehan, ‘Politics of piety’.

⁸⁵ Klein, The Mesta, 169ff.