💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › miguel-amoros-daybreak-in-dark-times.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:25:08. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Daybreak in Dark Times
Author: Miguel Amorós
Date: May 2014
Language: en
Topics: Spain, feudalism, peasants, history
Source: Retrieved on 11th May 2021 from https://libcom.org/history/daybreak-dark-times-origins-vicissitudes-village-commune-municipality-nobility-urban-oli
Notes: For the sixth issue of the journal, Raíces. Translated in May 2014 from the Spanish language text provided by the author.

Miguel Amorós

Daybreak in Dark Times

The dawn of a civilization is characterized by the absence of the State,

and the decline of a civilization, by its ubiquity. Ours has been no

exception. The first glimmer of freedom, the village commune, appeared

just at the end of the Roman Empire and then spread further during the

disintegration of the Frankish Kingdom, a process accompanied by the

crisis of large scale rural property and the slave mode of production.

The cities were gradually abandoned due, among other causes, to the

pressure of taxes and military conscription, and the population took up

residence in rural areas. Enormous differences in wealth led to the

emergence of gangs of the disinherited who since the times of the

Bagaudae roamed about the countryside and besieged the centers of power.

In the edicts of the Carolingian kings that were directed during the

9^(th) and 10^(th) centuries against the conspiracies and associations

of villains, we can discern a peasant resistance that was manifested in

various forms: runaway serfs, occupations of land, arson, robberies and

looting of properties…. The most important function of authority, tax

collection, was particularly detested. During this period, the

inhabitants of the Valle de Aran killed the son of the Count of

Ribagorça and lived for fifty consecutive years without any rulers, and

paid no taxes during that time.

It is true that in the less Romanized zones, in the valleys of the

Pyrenees, for example, the disappearance of the Carolingian state

favored a return to local clan and tribal traditions, based on the

communitarian organization of the territory, but this time linked to

geographical proximity rather than to kinship, as was the case in the

Cantabrian region. Each settlement possessed a particular territory in

common, which is why most property was logically communal. One could not

even speak of private property at all beyond the houses with their

nearby hay-ricks or gardens; at most, one could speak of fields or

enclosures for temporary private use, concerning which various

modalities of use existed: emprius, camps oberts, boïges, orris…. The

care and maintenance of the animals were also mostly communal, as were

the pastures. Communal usufruct was just as important for these agrarian

societies as the goods themselves. We are not referring to such

practices as the construction and maintenance of roads, bridges,

irrigation ditches, mills or ovens, the collective purchase of wheat or

moneyless exchange in settlements or vicus. The assemblies of neighbors

rendered decisions on lawsuits, sanctions, defense and other questions

of common interest, in accordance with orally transmitted customs. The

population continued cultivating the fields after the Moslem occupation,

but once the Moslems were driven from the area, the Counts, the only

State authorities that remained, attempted to establish, via their

agents, and by way of “aprisión”[1] and “ruptura”, their military and

fiscal administration in the newly won territories. Thus, communities

that were previously more or less independent were emerging alongside

small free landowners, masos and large estates that had previously been

cultivated by slaves, now transformed into tenant farms, where all the

varieties of dependence existed: serfs, tenents, colons, manents,

parcers….

Collectives were not the norm, nor was the allodial property whose roots

went back to Roman times: neither was capable of replacing large scale

property, nor did they have sufficient force to suppress the

representatives of the almost nonexistent royal authority, the Counts

(who were first appointed in 843), who administered their patrimony

after the Capitularies of Quierzy issued by the Emperor Charles the

Bald. Guifré el Pilós was the first Count of Barcelona who bequeathed

his position by inheritance. The rural community coexisted alongside

other powers, often in conflict with them. Throughout the 11^(th)

century, as the authority of the Counts declined, the pressure of the

military chiefs who commanded the castles (the castlans) caused the

situation of the peasants to deteriorate, most of whom submitted either

voluntarily or by force to vassalage. This implied imposts, fees, labor

services and other burdens that drastically curtailed their freedom,

ruined their farms and led to the loss of their lands (the small

allodial properties disappeared in the 11^(th) century, along with any

vestiges of state authority). Feudalism was at first a regime of

appropriation of rents, rather than a regime of ownership. The power of

the nobility was “banal”[2] rather than “dominical”[3]; it was based on

jurisdiction rather than on possession, which did not mean that its

beneficiaries neglected to take advantage of the lands of the fisc

(public lands) or the communal lands, or any piece of land that fell

into their hands. The feudal class was more inclined to exploit the land

they had appropriated with the farmers attached to it, but they also

rented out or surrendered their possessions by means of emphyteutic

leases. Furthermore, the need to repopulate the land for their own

benefit paradoxically compelled them to create spaces of liberty by way

of concessions of exemptions and privileges to those who wanted to

settle on it and cultivate it, especially in the semi-desert frontier

regions (the basin of the Llobregat River) that had been seized by

aprisión.

There is no doubt that the usurpation by the nobility was carried out

with violence, for it generated resistance that led to the formation of

the Assemblies of Peace and Truce in 1021. At the meetings held by these

movements, a place was set aside around the churches—the Sagrera—where

the exercise of violence was punished with excommunication. The

initiative was under the control of the abbots and priests, who wanted

to guarantee attendance at religious services and the markets without

the authority of the clergy being challenged. It is likely enough that

the first gangs of armed peasants known later as sagramentals, because

of the oath (sacramentum) that accompanied their formation, responded to

the need for self-defense against the feudal enemy. The flimsy authority

of the Counts did not permit them to play an effective role in these

assemblies until 1202, when a network of royal representatives or

veguers was formed to address this issue, and the “Peace of God” gave

way to the “Peace of the Lord-King”. By then, however, the correlation

of forces had changed due to the emergence of a new element that enjoyed

a certain degree of autonomy, that is, the villas or municipalities.

Towards the end of the 10^(th) century, cities practically did not

exist. The reality of the places that were still called cities was thus

minimal. Barcelona had only 1,500 inhabitants, and the other cities,

Perpiñán, Girona, Besalú, la Seu and Cardona (which had just been

founded), had barely a couple hundred residents. They were

administrative centers and their artisanal or mercantile activity was

scarce or nonexistent. As for their status, it did not differ very much

from that of the peasants. They were subject to feudal “malos usos”[4];

their privileges and customs were not respected. This situation changed,

however, in the 12^(th) century, a period of economic and military

expansion. This was the era of the conquest of the lands extending from

the Llobregat to the Ebro, an area that was later known as Catalunya

Nova. A 12^(th) century Italian chronicle called Ramón Berenguer III the

dux catalenses, although the word “Catalonia” does not appear in the

written record until 1217, and this was in Lleida. The first conquests

were Balaguer and Tarragona, which were followed by Lleida and Tortosa

when the County of Barcelona was merged into the Kingdom of Aragon in

1137. In order to repopulate the new regions, “Cartas Puebla”[5] were

granted, whose privileges went beyond the free administration of the

territory and allowed for the organization of an unrestricted

communitarian life: full rights of ownership, personal freedom,

security, suppression of any form of dependence, exemption from dues and

labor services, the right to hold fairs and markets, the power to

resolve their own lawsuits, self-government…. Not all the cities

possessed complete autonomy, however: Tarragona was at first under the

divided rule of the archbishop and the Norman mercenary who participated

in its conquest; Lleida was at first partitioned between the Count of

Urgell, the Count of Barcelona and the Order of the Templars; Tortosa

remained in the hands of the Moncadas and the Templars until 1294,

Agramunt was subject to the Count of Urgell…. Also, in the new domains

of the nobles who contributed to the military effort the peasants

settled in these regions enjoyed advantageous collective contracts.

In conjunction with these developments, in “Catalunya Vella” [“Old

Catalunya”] charters of franqueses i privilegis were also granted. Thus,

“villas francas” like Puigcerdà and Figueres were founded. In parallel

with these changes, the regions along the old frontier, such as Tárrega

and Cervera, were developed as mercadals. Even the monasteries were

forced to cede liberties and grant franchises to the inhabitants of

their fiefs (as in Camprodón, San Juan de las Abadesas, Banyoles).

Little by little, all the cities would break free of the feudal yoke,

obtaining new exemptions and recovering old liberties, thus setting an

example for the people of the villages, who put pressure on their lords

to acquire the same franchises. Barcelona, liberated from almost all the

dues and services to which it had previously been subjected by the

system of vassalage, was transformed into an important commercial center

that traded in salt, leather, weapons, fabrics and agricultural

products. There was constant construction of new urban districts where

the merchants, moneychangers and artisans lived, so that by the year

1200 it had 10,000 inhabitants. Until the middle of the 12^(th) century,

the cities did not have stable institutions, and convoked assemblies on

occasions when circumstances required them. Later they would be

organized in confratrias, associations of neighbors that usually forbade

the admission of priests and nobles, united by a solemn oath of defense,

similar to that of the French commune jurée. The general tenor of

municipal life was characterized by the enjoyment of liberties, a free

market, exemptions from taxes and dues, self-government and even,

sometimes, the right to coin money. All these rights, of course, were

nominally under the protection of the princeps, the king, the highest

authority. Its representatives, elected by a consell general, that is,

by an assembly of “all men” convoked to reach an agreement (concilium),

attended the meetings of Pau i Treva and advised the royal

representatives, the batlle or the curia, with regard to matters of high

justice or finance. They were at first called jurats, following custom,

or cónsols, which was a word derived from the Roman past. Assisted by

the advisors or consellers, they exercised administrative, fiscal and

ordinary justice functions, always controlled by the consell, which met

at the foot of the city walls, in a courtyard or in the atrium of a

church. In Barcelona these meetings were held on the stairs of the Royal

Palace or in the cloisters of the Convent of Santa Catalina. Up until

the 14^(th) century there was no single building dedicated to such

gatherings, such as, for example, the “palacio de la Paería” of Lleida

or the “Salón de Ciento” in Barcelona. As the city grew, however, the

“General Council” was reduced to an assembly of prohoms, i.e.,

prestigious citizens, which status was at first conferred on the basis

of their moral authority; later, when the citizenry was stratified into

“menores” and “mayores”, it was based on their possessions or wealth.

The whole collection of town charters, exemptions, royal privileges,

popular grants and communitarian “franchises” constitutes a considerable

legal corpus that demarcates the passage from a customary regime of

self-government to a different regime based on the written law. The

decisive step was taken during the 13^(th) century with the introduction

of the common law (derived from an interpretation in a medieval sense of

the Justinian Code), whose most important index is the concept of

universitas. The “universidad” is the community as a juridical

personality, independent of its individual members. As an autonomous

entity with its own patrimony, it is empowered to provide itself with

institutions of government and administration of the communal property

in accordance with its customs and laws, appointing the responsible

representatives and officials required for its operations. As a result

of these stipulations, an enormous amount of documentation would be

generated, and the specialists in the laws, that is, notaries and

jurists, would play a leading role in this institution. During this

period the municipal regions were completely structured on three levels:

the magistrates (who in Lleida and Cervera were called paers), the

advisory council and the limited general council, along with an

ever-expanding bureaucracy. This model would later be imitated in the

rural districts, where the comú was the equivalent of the universidad,

and they would be governed by an elected Communal Council composed of

“cónsules”.

The economic growth of the 13^(th) century would have an impact on the

cities, transforming them into centers of power and wealth with a

distinct differentiation of classes or “manos” [“hands”]. In Barcelona,

the popular estate was subdivided in 1226. The má major corresponded to

the urban patriciate, dedicated to money-lending, foreign trade and real

estate finance. This group dominated the Consell de prohoms of

Barcelona. The manufacturers, merchants and “artists” or professionals

belonged to the mà mijana or mà mediocre; the sailors and the artisans

belonged to the mà menor. The masses of apprentices, journeymen, poor

people and women were not represented in this system. Logically, power

and influence were apportioned directly in accordance with wealth, and

were therefore concentrated in the mà mayor, a small group whose members

called themselves ciutadans honrats in Barcelona, and simply cives in

Girona. In short, the big bourgeoisie. The incipient patrician oligarchy

established very close connections with the crown, because the latter’s

expansionist military expeditions were financed by the oligarchy. The

Catalonian-Aragonese Monarchy, an embryonic State that did not include

all the Counties, was further reinforced in its struggle against the

aristocratic military caste, first by the Assemblies of Peace and Truce,

and later by Las Cortes (the first formal session of the Catalonian

Corte was convened in Barcelona in 1283), although this was achieved

only in exchange for concessions to the military elements that

reinforced the institution of serfdom and the institution of servile

adscription to the soil, the remença. The crown had permanent

representatives in every municipality under its jurisdiction. What was

peculiar about these representatives was the fact that they had to abide

by the determinations of the Council and had to respect the local

consuetudines [customary rights] and common law.

The atmosphere of freedom that pulsed through the cities prevailed in

hard times, when the cities had to be defended with arms in hand from

the barons and “castlans”, but the peace that was favorable for market

relations did not prove to be favorable for an extension of that same

freedom, but rather favored its transfer into the hands of a handful of

city elites, enriched on land speculation, financing the royal

enterprises, purchase of the public debt and trade on a grand scale. The

function of the new bourgeois oligarchy was similar to that which had

been performed up until that point by the Jewish minority. Now that the

cives e burguenses [citizens and bourgeoisie] were on the same level as

the cavallers e varvassors [knights and vassals] in the royal

compilation of Los Usatges, the bourgeois elite would attempt to obtain

a monopoly over the municipal government and manage it for its own

profit. In this undertaking it could count on the invaluable

collaboration of the crown. It is evident that there was a parallel

development between its consolidation as a directive group and the

establishment of a hierarchical and bureaucratic municipal regime, in

which direct election was replaced by royal appointment and the system

of cooptation. Contrary to what took place in Castile, the petty

nobility did not play any role in the Councils. The suppression of the

general assemblies, replaced by limited councils that excluded any

popular representation, would be a milestone in the patricians’ rise to

municipal power. In Barcelona it was the product of a royal grant of

franchise of 1249 that provoked protests and riots. The provisional

solution led to the formation of a council of two hundred prohombres

belonging to the three urban orders [“manos”]. Nonetheless, the

oligarchy persisted in its attempts to shift the balance of forces in

its favor and in 1265 the number of members of the council was reduced

by half: this was known as the Consell de Cent. A similar process

unfolded in the other “major” cities that were the administrative

centers of the various Counties, but the patricians did not succeed in

abolishing the “general council” until the end of the century, and the

last general councils to hold power were eliminated in Lleida (1386) and

Manresa (1393). With its privileges confirmed in perpetuity in

Barcelona—the Recognoverunt proceres of 1284—the municipal authority

was, without any debate, authorized to select its councilors and convene

its councils.

The urban oligarchy soon extended its arena of influence to the

surrounding countryside, by becoming the owner of the land. Furthermore,

as administrator or landlord of seigneurial properties, it ultimately

inherited many rights that had previously pertained to the nobility. It

thus became a solid defender of “malos usos”, feudal services, peasant

adscription to the land, and burdensome dues. Its interests were much

less opposed to those of the nobility than to those of the other

“orders” (“manos”), as it was an implacable enemy of the remences

peasants (the glebe serfs of Catalunya Vella). But its political power

clearly depended on the Monarchy. In the 13^(th) and 14^(th) centuries

the ruling class was still the nobility, whose rights and abuses had

been confirmed in the Usatges. Royal jurisdiction did not affect more

than 14% of the territory and 22% of the population. The 12^(th) century

proved to be more favorable for the Barons than for the Counts and the

King, but during the 13^(th) century the Barons entered into conflict

with the Monarchy, leading to various deseiximents or renunciations of

the oath of loyalty, until they were defeated in 1280 at Balaguer. The

urban patriciate not only supported the crown, since the bourgeois order

was intimately linked with the fortunes of the latter, but also

advocated with all its power the enforcement of royal jurisdiction.

Then, amidst the profound crisis of the 13^(th) century, the increasing

need for generating revenues from rents led the nobles to more

intensively exploit the peasants under their jurisdiction. On the other

hand, oligarchic power in the cities had caused urban uprisings and

revolts, which were sometimes pacified by means of executions.

Catalonian feudal society was beginning to break up due to the popular

response; in the municipalities, because of the indignation of the poble

menut, and in the countryside by the “malos usos” and the remença

question. The lower orders organized their associations and presented

memorials of their grievances; the peasants who fled from the

seigneurial estates occupied masos rònecs (abandoned lands) from which

they resisted the barons. A convenient remedy that diverted the social

crisis from its logical course was the anti-Jewish pogrom, but an even

more effective measure to achieve the same end was the expansionist war

between the Monarchies of Castile and Aragon, known as the dels dos

Peres. The war was declared when the royal coffers still had not been

refilled after the expense incurred by the Unión popular uprising of

Valencia, which had itself been triggered by royal taxation. The

occasion was effectively taken advantage of by the oligarchy, which

obtained maximal representation as a real force on the permanent

Commission formed at the Cortes of 1358 to raise taxes for the war, the

generalitats, known as the Diputación del General. At that time

Barcelona had a meager population of 34,000 inhabitants.

The hegemony of the patriciate was sanctioned by the creation of the

Generalitat and, later, by the Compromiso de Caspe. The big bourgeoisie

of Catalonia was on the winning side, which chose the Castilian

Fernando, “the Antequerano”, as King. Its members bought titles of

nobility and adopted an aristocratic way of life. Municipal rule became

so absolute that it engendered all the vices that are associated with

the uncontrolled exercise of power: embezzlement of public funds,

perversion of justice, incompetence, nepotism, corruption…. In 1455 the

municipal government of Barcelona was momentarily overthrown by the

popular party of La Busca, supported by the crown, but it was soon

restored to power. The strengthening of the monarchical State had

reached the point where it was harmful for its class interests.

Entrenched in the Generalitat and the Consell de Cent, in an alliance

with the nobility, it fought against the peasants, the buscaires and the

king, becoming embroiled in a civil war that ended with its defeat in

1472. This was only a temporary setback, however; in its very defeat it

recovered some of its positions. The war had much worse results for the

remences peasants, who were forced to engage in another revolt. The

foundations of oligarchic influence remained intact; the losers were the

popular institutions and classes, who were burdened with higher taxes

and dues. Barcelona would not recover the commercial power it enjoyed in

the past, which did not affect a class that was now living off of

revenues derived from rents, rather than from trade. The electoral

reforms introduced in association with the system of adjustments in the

major cities complicated the patrimonialization of the municipal

governments, but did not abolish it. The Corts de Montsó of 1510 granted

the “ciudadanos honrados” the same rights as the knights and the petty

nobility. The merger of the kingdoms of Castile and Aragon that created

Spain did not appear affect the cities one way or the other. The

Catalonian urban oligarchy, now with noble status, continued to manage

the “Principado” in favor of its own interests until the War of the

Spanish Succession, although with momentary eclipses (such as that of

the Guerra dels Segadors) and enduring uprisings by the popular sector

at critical moments. It bequeathed to modernity a model of power that is

today supported and zealously imitated by the “soberanista” party.

[1] During the Carolingian era, fallow or waste land which, in

Septimania or the Spanish March, was granted in benefice to a peasant

for a term of thirty years for the purpose of land clearance and

settlement [Translator’s Note].

[2] Based on feudal “banalities”, involving economic monopolies on

certain necessary processes related to agriculture or other productive

activities, such as milling grain or pressing wine, which were jealously

exploited by military vassals, who, in exchange for the use of their

mills or presses by their serfs or villains, exacted a portion of the

product or a monetary fee [Translator’s Note].

[3] Based on the Roman concept of quiritary, or in contemporary English

terminology, “fee simple” ownership, which is the most comprehensive

form of individual ownership under modern English common law

[Translator’s Note].

[4] “Abuses”: the feudal lords’ abusive imposition of extra labor

services, dues and other forms of tribute on the peasants in excess of

traditional customary rights [Translator’s Note].

[5] Charters granted by the royal authority for settlements in the lands

recently conquered from the Moslems [Translator’s Note].