Dual Crowns In Spain For Ferdinand and Isabella United Separate Entities

One of the reasons I've enjoyed J.H. Elliott's Imperial Spain 1469-1716 is its clear explication of Spanish spheres both internally and externally. In an era when the prevailing culture was self-described as being new (and is still called and thought of as such five-hundred years later), Elliott asserts that Spain did not follow those patterns. The joint but dual crown of Ferdinand and Isabella was different than what was previously known there, he says, but government institutions and the ways they handled themselves and circumstances remained remarkably consistent with what had happened before. In many ways, the means with which they could have handled new situations, were instead based on precedent and traditional methods. Elliott looks at both the external relations and, internally, under both crowns independently, to make his case.

Following chapters on the unification of the two newly unified crowns of Aragon and Castile, and another charting the advances of the reconquista in the later 1400's, Elliott begins his chapter on 'The Ordering of Spain' in this way.

"The late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries are commonly described as the age of 'the new monarchies': an age in which such forceful monarchies as Henry VII in England and Louis XI of France consolidated the power of the crown and devoted their efforts to the creation of a unified and centralized State under royal control.... Yet in practice the Spain created by Ferdinand and Isabella diverged in so many respects from the theoretical model of the 'new monarchy', as to make it appear either that it must be entirely excluded from the European model, or alternatively that the model itself is at fault." [p. 77]

Contemporary with Elliott's treatment, J.D. Mackie's history of The Earliest Tudors shows Henry VII in England as being very careful not to appear too new, for his own reasons. Similarly, Ferdinand in Aragon, Valencia, and Catalonia worked at maintaining the traditional modes of rule by consent of the governed while buttressing the old forms of royal authority. But so did Isabella in her way in her inherited lands. For them, a king was right to exercise his authority, to assert their dominance and to 'protect the weak' as well as 'humble the proud'. This was in line with both monarchs of Spain during their joint rule, keeping intact their intentions and ideals. These rights and privileges, Elliott notes, rarely carried over from King to Queen or vice versa, in more ways than name, from one set of states to the other's. This was in keeping with their hewing to the charters of their respective states and their outlook.

Elliott treats both of these differently and explains this by saying there was no movement between the two joint monarchs, in either royal person trying to legally appropriate each other's crowns.

"These rights, and the laws which guaranteed them, naturally varied considerably in Castile and Aragon, but the fact that the two Crowns were now united did not in any way imply their legal and constitutional systems should be brought into line." [p. 78]

Elliott cites their marriage contract, the coat of arms constructed for them, and Queen Isabella's will to show the limits of their dual crowns. He helpfully goes on to delineate both the status quo and the changes for Aragon and for Castile during their respective tenures, providing a rich flavor of the differences.
_____________________________________
J.H. Elliott: Imperial Spain 1469-1716 : Penguin, NY, 2002