The History Of Spain To The Conquest Of Granada
Author: Hallam, Henry
Part IV
No people in a half-civilized state of society have a full practical
security against particular acts of arbitrary power. They were more common
perhaps in Castile than in any other European monarchy which professed to be
free. Laws indeed were not wanting to protect men's lives and liberties, as
well as their properties. Ferdinand IV., in 1299, agreed to a petition that
"justice shall be executed impartially according to law and right; and that no
one shall be put to death or imprisoned, or deprived of his possessions,
without trial, and that this be better observed than heretofore." ^g He
renewed the same law in 1307. Nevertheless, the most remarkable circumstance
of this monarch's history was a violation of so sacred and apparently so well
established a law. Two gentlemen having been accused of murder, Ferdinand,
without waiting for any process, ordered them to instant execution. They
summoned him with their last words to appear before the tribunal of God in
thirty days; and his death within the time, which has given him the surname of
the Summoned, might, we may hope, deter succeeding sovereigns from iniquity so
flagrant. But from the practice of causing their enemies to be assassinated,
neither law nor conscience could withhold them. Alfonso XI. was more than
once guilty of this crime. Yet he too passed an ordinance in 1325 that no
warrant should issue for putting any one to death, or seizing his property,
till he should be duly tried by course of law. Henry II. repeats the same law
in very explicit language. ^h But the civil history of Spain displays several
violations of it. An extraordinary prerogative of committing murder appears
to have been admitted in early times by several nations who did not
acknowledge unlimited power in their sovereign. ^i Before any regular police
was established, a powerful criminal might have been secure from all
punishment but for a notion, as barbarous as any which it served to
counteract, that he could be lawfully killed by the personal mandate of the
king. And the frequent attendance of sovereigns in their courts of judicature
might lead men not accustomed to consider the indispensable necessity of legal
forms to confound an act of assassination with the execution of justice.
[Footnote g: Que mandase facer la justicia en aquellos que la merecen
comunalmente con fuero e. con derecho e los homes que non sean muertos nin
presos nin tomados lo que han sin ser oidos por derecho o por fuero de aquel
logar do acaesciere, e que sea guardado mejor que se guardo fasta aqui.
Marina, Ensayo Hist.-Critico, p. 148.]
[Footnote h: Que non mandemos matar nin prender nin lisiar nin despechar nin
tomar a alguno ninguna cosa de lo suyo, sin ser ante llamado e oido e vencido
por fuero e por derecho, por querella nin por querellas que a nos fuesen
dadas, segunt que esto esta ordenado por el rei don Alonso nuestro padre.
Teoria de las Cortes, t. ii. p. 287.]
[Footnote i: Si quis hominem per jussionem regis vel ducis sui occiderit, non
requiratur ei, nec sit faidosus, quia jussio domini sui fuit, et non potuit
contradicere jussionem. Leges Bajuvariorum, tit. ii. in Baluz Capitularibus.]
Though it is very improbable that the nobility were not considered as
essential members of the cortes, they certainly attended in smaller numbers
than we should expect to find from the great legislative and deliberative
authority of that assembly. This arose chiefly from the lawless spirit of
that martial aristocracy which placed less confidence in the constitutional
methods of resisting arbitrary encroachment than in its own armed
combinations. ^j Such confederacies to obtain redress of grievances by force,
of which there were five or six remarkable instances, were called Hermandad
(brotherhood or union), and, though not so explicitly sanctioned as they were
by the celebrated Privilege of Union in Aragon, found countenance in a law of
Alfonso X., which cannot be deemed so much to have voluntarily emanated from
that prince as to be a record of original rights possessed by the Castilian
nobility. "The duty of subjects towards their king," he says, "enjoins them
not to permit him knowingly to endanger his salvation, nor to incur dishonor
and inconvenience in his person or family, nor to produce mischief to his
kingdom. And this may be fulfilled in two ways: one by good advice, showing
him the reason wherefore he ought not to act thus; the other by deeds, seeking
means to prevent his going on to his own ruin, and putting a stop to those who
give him ill counsel, forasmuch as his errors are of worse consequence than
those of other men; it is the bounden duty of subjects to prevent his
committing them." ^k To this law the insurgents appealed in their coalition
against Alvaro de Luna; and indeed we must confess that, however just and
admirable and principles which it breathes, so general a license of rebellion
was not likely to preserve the tranquility of a kingdom. The deputies of
towns in a cortes of 1445 petitioned the king to declare that no construction
should be put on this law inconsistent with the obedience of subjects towards
their sovereign; a request to which of course he willingly acceded.
[Footnote j: Teoria de las Cortes, t. ii. p. 465.]
[Footnote k: Ensayo Hist.-Critico, p. 312.]
Castile, it will be apparent, bore a closer analogy to England in its
form of civil polity than France or even Aragon. But the frequent disorders
of its government and a barbarous state of manners rendered violations of law
much more continual and flagrant than they were in England under the
Plantaganet dynasty. And besides these practical mischiefs, there were two
essential defects in the constitution of Castile, through which perhaps it was
ultimately subverted. It wanted those two brilliants in the coronet of
British liberty, the representation of freeholders among the commons, and
trial by jury. The cortes of Castile became a congress of deputies from a few
cities, public-spirited indeed and intrepid, as we find them in bad times, to
an eminent degree, but too much limited in number, and too unconnected with
the territorial aristocracy, to maintain a just balance against the crown.
Yet, with every disadvantage, that country possessed a liberal form of
government, and was animated with a noble spirit for its defence. Spain, in
her late memorable though short resuscitation, might well have gone back to
her ancient institutions, and perfected a scheme of policy which the great
example of England would have shown to be well adapted to the security of
freedom. What she did, or rather attempted, instead, I need not recall. May
her next effort be more wisely planned, and more happily terminated! ^l
[Footnote l: The first edition of this work was published in 1818.]
Though the kingdom of Aragon was very inferior in extent to that of
Castile, yet the advantages of a better form of government and wiser
sovereigns, with those of industry and commerce along a line of seacoast,
rendered it almost equal in importance. Castile rarely intermeddled in the
civil dissensions of Aragon; the kings of Aragon frequently carried their arms
into the heart of Castile. During the sanguinary outrages of Peter the Cruel,
and the stormy revolutions which ended in establishing the house of
Trastamare, Aragon was not indeed at peace, nor altogether well governed; but
her political consequence rose in the eyes of Europe through the long reign of
the ambitious and wily Peter IV., whose sagacity and good fortune redeemed,
according to the common notions of mankind, the iniquity with which he
stripped his relation the King of Majorca of the Balearic islands, and the
constant perfidiousness of his character. I have mentioned in another place
the Sicilian war, prosecuted with so much eagerness for many years by Peter
III. and his son Alfonso III. After this object was relinquished James II.
undertook an enterprise less splendid, but not much less difficult: the
conquest of Sardinia. That island, long accustomed to independence, cost an
incredible expense of blood and treasure to the kings of Aragon during the
whole fourteenth century. It was not fully subdued till the commencement of
the next, under the reign of Martin.
At the death of Martin King of Aragon, in 1410, a memorable question
arose as to the right of succession. Though Petronilla, daughter of Ramiro
II., had reigned in her own right from 1137 to 1172, an opinion seems to have
gained ground from the thirteenth century that females could not inherit the
crown of Aragon. Peter IV. had incited a civil war by attempting to settle
the succession upon his daughter, to the exclusion of his next brother. The
birth of a son about the same time suspended the ultimate decision of this
question; but it was tacitly understood that what is called the Salic law
ought to prevail. ^m Accordingly, on the death of John I. in 1395, his two
daughters were set aside in favor of his brother Martin, though not without
opposition on the part of the elder, whose husband, the Count of Foix, invaded
the kingdom, and desisted from his pretension only through want of force.
Martin's son, the King of Sicily, dying in his father's lifetime, the nation
was anxious that the king should fix upon his successor, and would probably
have acquiesced in his choice. But his dissolution occurring more rapidly than
was expected, the throne remained absolutely vacant. The Count of Urgel had
obtained a grant of the lieutenancy, which was the right of the heir apparent.
This nobleman possessed an extensive territory in Catalonia, bordering on the
Pyrenees. He was grandson of James, next brother to Peter IV., and, according
to the rules of inheritance, certainly stood in the first place. The other
claimants were the Duke of Gandia, grandson of James II., who, though
descended from a more distant ancestor, set up a claim founded on proximity to
the royal stock, which in some countries was preferred to a representative
title; the Duke of Calabria, son of Violante, younger daughter of John I. (the
Countess of Foix being childless); Frederic Count of Luna, a natural son of
the younger Martin King of Sicily, legitimated by the pope, but with a
reservation excluding him from royal succession; and finally, Ferdinand,
infant of Castile, son of the late king's sister. ^n The Count of Urgel was
favored in general by the Catalans, and he seemed to have a powerful support
in Antonio de Luna, a baron of Aragon, so rich that he might go through his
own estate from France to Castile. But this apparent superiority frustrated
his hopes. The justiciary and other leading Aragonese were determined not to
suffer this great constitutional question to be decided by an appeal to force,
which might sweep away their liberties in the struggle. Urgel, confident of
his right, and surrounded by men of ruined fortunes, was unwilling to submit
his pretensions to a civil tribunal. His adherent, Antonio de Luna, committed
an extraordinary outrage, the assassination of the Archbishop of Saragossa,
which alienated the minds of good citizens from his cause. On the other hand,
neither the Duke of Gandia, who was very old, ^o nor the Count of Luna, seemed
fit to succeed. The party of Ferdinand, therefore, gained ground by degrees.
It was determined however, to render a legal sentence. The cortes of each
nation agreed upon the nomination of nine persons, three Aragonese, three
Catalans, and three Valencians, who were to discuss the pretensions of the
several competitors, and by a plurality of six votes to adjudge the crown.
Nothing could be more solemn, more peaceful, nor, in appearance, more
equitable than the proceedings of this tribunal. They summoned the claimants
before them, and heard them by counsel. One of these, Frederic of Luna, being
ill-defended, the court took charge of his interests, and named other
advocates to maintain them. A month was passed in hearing arguments; a second
was alloted to considering them; and at the expiration of the prescribed time
it was announced to the people, by the mouth of St. Vincent Ferrier, that
Ferdinand of Castile had ascended the throne. ^p [A.D. 1412.]
[Footnote m: Zurita, t. ii. f. 188. It was pretended that women were excluded
from the crown in England as well as France: and this analogy seems to have
had some influence in determining the Aragonese to adopt a Salic law.]
[Footnote n: The subjoined pedigree will show more clearly the respective
titles of the competitors: -
[See Table 1: Pedigree Of Titles]
[Footnote o: This Duke of Gandia died during the interregnum. His son, though
not so objectionable on the score of age, seemed to have a worse claim; yet he
became a competitor.]
[Footnote p: Biancae Commentaria, in Schotti Hispania Illustrata, t. ii.
Zurita, t. iii. f. I-74. Vincent Ferrier was the most distinguished churchman
of his time in Spain. His influence, as one of the nine judges, is said to
have been very instrumental in procuring the crown for Ferdinand. Five others
voted the same way; one for the Count of Urgel; one doubtfully between the
Count of Urgel and Duke of Gandia; the ninth declined to vote. Zurita, t.
iii. f. 71. It is curious enough that John King of Castile was altogether
disregarded; though his claim was at least as plausible as that of his uncle
Ferdinand. Indeed, upon the principle of inheritance to which we are
accustomed, Louis Duke of Calabria had a prior right to Ferdinand, admitting
the rule which it was necessary for both of them to establish; namely, that a
right of succession might be transmitted through females which females could
not personally enjoy. This, as is well known, had been advanced in the
preceding age by Edward III. as the foundation of his claim to the throne of
France.]
In this decision it is impossible not to suspect that the judges were
swayed rather by politic considerations than a strict sense of hereditary
right. It was, therefore, by no means universally popular, especially in
Catalonia, of which principality the Count of Urgel was a native; and perhaps
the great rebellion of the Catalans fifty years afterwards may be traced to
the disaffection which this breach, as they thought, of the lawful succession
had excited. Ferdinand, however, was well received in Aragon. The cortes
generously recommended the Count of Urgel to his favor, on account of the
great expenses he had incurred in prosecuting his claim. But Urgel did not
wait the effect of this recommendation. Unwisely attempting a rebellion with
every inadequate means, he lost his estates, and was thrown for life into
prison. Ferdinand's successor was his son, Alfonso V., more distinguished in
the history of Italy than of Spain. [A.D. 1416.] For all the latter years of
his life he never quitted the kingdom that he had acquired by his arms; and,
enchanted by the delicious air of Naples, intrusted the government of his
patrimonial territories to the care of a brother and an heir. John II. [A.D.
1458], upon whom they devolved by the death of Alfonso without legitimate
progeny, had been engaged during his youth in the turbulent revolutions of
Castile, as the head of a strong party that opposed the domination of alvaro
de Luna. By marriage with the heiress of Navarre he was entitled, according
to the usage of those times, to assume the title of king, and administration
of government, during her life. But his ambitious retention of power still
longer produced events which are the chief stain on his memory. Charles
Prince of Viana was, by the constitution of Navarre, entitled to succeed his
mother. [A.D. 1420.] She had requested him in her testament not to assume the
government without his father's consent. That consent was always withheld.
The prince raised what we ought not to call a rebellion; but was made
prisoner, and remained for some time captivity. [A.D. 1442.] John's ill
disposition towards his son was exasperated by a step-mother, who scarcely
disguised her intention of placing her own child on the throne of Aragon at
the expense of the eldest born. After a life of perpetual oppression, chiefly
passed in exile or captivity, the Prince of Viana died in Catalonia, at a
moment when that province was in open insurrection upon his account. [A.D.
1461.] Though it hardly seems that the Catalans had any more general
provocations, they persevered for more than ten years with inveterate
obstinacy in their rebellion, offering the sovereignty first to a prince of
Portugal, and afterwards to Regnier Duke of Anjou, who was destined to pass
his life in unsuccessful competition for kingdoms. The King of Aragon behaved
with great clemency towards these insurgents on their final submission.
It is consonant to the principle of this work to pass lightly over the
common details of history, in order to fix the reader's attention more fully
on subjects of philosophical inquiry. Perhaps in no European monarchy except
England was the form of government more interesting than in Aragon, as a
fortunate temperament of law and justice with the royal authority. So far as
anything can be pronounced of its earlier period before the capture of
Saragossa in 1118, it was a kind of regal aristocracy, where a small number of
powerful barons elected their sovereign on every vacancy, though, as usual in
other countries, out of one family; and considered him as little more than the
chief of their confederacy. ^q These were the ricoshombres or barons, the
first order of the State. Among these the kings of Aragon, in subsequent
times, as they extended their dominions, shared the conquered territory in
grants of honors on a feudal tenure. ^r For this system was fully established
in the kingdom of Aragon. A ricohombre, as we read in Vitalis Bishop of
Huesca, about the middle of the thirteenth century, ^s must hold of the king
an honor or barony capable of supporting more than three knights; and this he
was bound to distribute among his vassals in military fiefs. Once in the year
he might be summoned with his feudatories to serve the sovereign for two
months (Zurita says three); and he was to attend the royal court, or general
assembly, as a counsellor, whenever called upon, assisting in its judicial as
well as deliberative business. In the towns and villages of his barony he
might appoint bailiffs to administer justice and receive penalties; but the
higher criminal jurisdiction seems to have been reserved to the crown.
According to Vitalis, the king could divest these ricoshombres of their honors
at pleasure, after which they fell into the class of mesnadaries, or mere
tenants in chief. But if this were constitutional in the reign of James I.,
which Blancas denies, it was not long permitted by that high-spirited
aristocracy. By the General Privilege or Charter of Peter III. it is declared
that no barony can be taken away without a just cause and legal sentence of
the justiciary and council of barons. ^t And the same protection was extended
to the vassals of the ricoshombres.
[Footnote q: Alfonso III. complained that his barons wanted to bring back old
times, quando havia en el reyno tantos reyes como ricos hombres. Biancae
Commentaria, p. 787. The form of election supposed to have been used by these
bold barons is well known. "We, who are as good as you, choose you for our
king and lord, provided that you observe our laws and privileges; and if not,
not." But I do not much believe the authenticity of this form of words. See
Robertson's Charles V. vol. i. note 31. It is, however, sufficiently
agreeable to the spirit of the old government.]
[Footnote r: Los ricos hombres, por los feudos que tenian del rey, eran
obligados de seguir al rey, si yva en persona a la guerra, y residir en ella
tres meses en cadaun ano. Zurita, t. i. fol. 43. (Saragossa, 1610.) A fief
was usually called in Aragon an honor, que en Castilla llamavan tierra, y en
el principado de Cataluna feudo. fol. 46.]
[Footnote s: I do not know whether this work of Vitalis has been printed; but
there are large extracts from it in Blancas' history, and also in Du Cange,
under the words Infancia, Mesandarius, &c. Several illustrations of these
military tenures may be found in the Fueros de Aragon, especially lib. 7.]
[Footnote t: Biancae Comm. p. 730.]
Below these superior nobles were the mesnadaries, corresponding to our
mere tenants in chief, holding estates not baronial immediately from the
crown; and the military vassals of the high nobility, the knights and
infanzones; a word which may be rendered by gentleman. These had considerable
privileges in that aristocratic government; they were exempted from all taxes,
they could only be tried by the royal judges for any crime; and offences
committed against them were punished with additional severity. ^u The ignoble
classes were, as in other countries, the burgesses of towns, and the villeins
or peasantry. The peasantry seem to have been subject to territorial
servitude, as in France and England. Vitalis says that some villeins were
originally so unprotected that, as he expresses it, they might be divided into
pieces by sword among the sons of their masters, till they were provoked to an
insurrection, which ended in establishing certain stipulations, whence they
obtained the denomination of villeins de parada, or of convention. ^v
[Footnote u: Ibid., 732.]
[Footnote v: Ibid., p. 729.]
Though from the twelfth century the principle of hereditary succession to
the throne superseded, in Aragon as well as Castile, the original right of
choosing a sovereign within the royal family, it was still founded upon one
more sacred and fundamental, that of compact, No King of Aragon was entitled
to assume that name until he had taken a coronation oath, administered by the
justiciary of Saragossa, to observe the laws and liberties of the realm. ^w
Alfonso III., in 1285, being in France at the time of his father's death,
named himself king in addressing the States, who immediately remonstrated on
this premature assumption of his title, and obtained an apology. ^x Thus, too,
Martin, having been called to the crown of Aragon by the cortes in 1395, was
especially required not to exercise any authority before his coronation. ^y
[Footnote w: Zurita, Anales de Aragon, t. i. fol. 104, t. iii. fol. 76.]
[Footnote x: Biancae Comm. p. 661. They acknowledged, at the same time, that
he was their natural lord, and entitled to reign as lawful heir to his father
- so oddly were the herditary and elective titles jumbled together. Zurita, t.
i. fol. 303.]
[Footnote y: Zurita, t. ii. fol. 424.]
Blancas quotes a noble passage from the acts of cortes in 1451. "We have
always heard of old time, and it is found by experience, that, seeing the
great barrenness of this land, and the poverty of the realm, if it were not
for the liberties thereof, the folk would go hence to live and abide in other
realms and lands more fruitful." ^z This high spirit of freedom had long
animated the Aragonese. After several contests with the crown in the reign of
James I., not to go back to earlier times, they compelled Peter III. in 1283
to grant a law, called the General Privilege, the Magna Charta of Aragon, and
perhaps a more full and satisfactory basis of civil liberty than our own. It
contains a series of provisions against arbitrary tallages, spoliations of
property, secret process after the manner of the Inquisition in criminal
charges, sentences of the justiciary without assent of the cortes, appointment
of foreigners or Jews to judicial offices, trials of accused persons in places
beyond the kingdom, the use of torture, except in charges of falsifying coin,
and the bribery of judges. These are claimed as the ancient liberties of
their country. "Absolute power (mero imperio e mixto)," it is declared,
"never was the constitution of Aragon, nor of Valencia, nor yet of Ribagorca,
nor shall there be in time to come any innovation made; but only the law,
custom, and privilege which has been anciently used in the aforesaid
kingdoms." ^a
[Footnote z: Siempre havemos oydo dezir antigament, e se troba por
esperiencia, que attendida la grand sterilidad de aquesta tierra, e pobreza de
aqueste regno, si non fues por las libertades de aquel, se yrian a bivir, y
habitar las gentes a otros regnos, e tierras mas frutieras. p. 571. Aragon
was, in fact, a poor country, barren and ill-peopled. The kings were forced
to go to Catalonia for money, and indeed were little able to maintain
expensive contests. The wars of Peter IV. in Sardinia, and of Alfonso V. with
Genoa and Naples, impoverished their people. A hearth-tax having been imposed
in 1404, it was found that there were 42,683 houses in Aragon, which,
according to most calculations, will give less than 300,000 inhabitants. In
1429, a similar tax being laid on, it is said that the number of houses was
diminished in consequence of war. Zurita, t. iii. fol. 189. It contains at
present [1818] between 600,000 and 700,000 inhabitants.]
[Footnote a: Fueros de Aragon, fol. 9; Zurita, t. i. fol. 265.]
The concessions extorted by our ancestors from John, Henry III., and
Edward I. were secured by the only guarantee those times could afford, the
determination of the barons to enforce them by armed confederacies. These,
however, were formed according to emergencies, and, except in the famous
commission of twenty-five conservators of Magna Charta, in the last year of
John, were certainly unwarranted by law. But the Aragonese established a
positive right of maintaining their liberties by arms. This was contained in
the Privilege of Union granted by Alfonso III. in 1287, after a violent
conflict with his subjects; but which was afterwards so completely abolished,
and even eradicated from the records of the kingdom, that its precise words
have never been recovered. ^b According to Zurita, it consisted of two
articles: first, that in the case of the king's proceeding forcibly against
any member of the union without previous sentence of the justiciary, the rest
should be absolved from their allegiance; secondly, that he should hold cortes
every year in Saragossa. ^c During the two subsequent reigns of James II. and
Alfonso IV. little pretence seems to have been given for the exercise of this
right. But dissensions breaking out under Peter IV. in 1347, rather on
account of his attempt to settle the crown upon his daughter than of any
specific public grievances, the nobles had recourse to the Union, that last
voice, says Blancas, of an almost expiring state, full of weight and dignity,
to chastise the presumption of kings. ^d They assembled at Saragossa, and used
a remarkable seal for all their public instruments, an engraving from which
may be seen in the historian I have just quoted. It represents the king
sitting on his throne, with the confederates kneeling in a suppliant attitude
around, to denote their loyalty and unwillingness to offend. But in the
background tents and lines of spears are discovered, as a hint of their
ability and resolution to defend themselves. The legend is Sigillum Unionis
Aragonum. This respectful demeanor towards a sovereign against whom they were
waging war reminds us of the language held out by The Long Parliament before
the Presbyterian party was overthrown. And although it has been highly
censured as inconsistent and hypocritical, this tone is the safest that men
can adopt, who, deeming themselves under the necessity of withstanding the
reigning monarch, are anxious to avoid a change of dynasty, or subversion of
their constitution. These confederates were defeated by the king at Epila in
1348. ^e But his prudence and the remaining strength of his opponents inducing
him to pursue a moderate course, there ensued a more legitimate and permanent
balance of the constitution from this victory of the royalists. The Privilege
of Union was abrogated, Peter himself cutting to pieces with his sword the
original instrument. But in return many excellent laws for the security of
the subject were enacted; ^f and their preservation was intrusted to the
greatest officer of the kingdom, the justiciary, whose authority and
preeminence may in a great degree be dated from this period. ^g That
watchfulness over public liberty, which originally belonged to the aristocracy
of ricoshombres, always apt to thwart the crown or to oppress the people, and
which was afterwards maintained by the dangerous Privilege of Union, became
the duty of a civil magistrate, accustomed to legal rules and responsible for
his actions, whose office and functions are the most pleasing feature in the
constitutional history of Aragon.
[Footnote b: Blancas says that he had discovered a copy of the Privilege of
Union in the archives of the see of Tarragona, and would gladly have published
it, but for his deference to the wisdom of former ages, which had studiously
endeavored to destroy all recollection of that dangerous law. p. 662.]
[Footnote c: Zurita, t. i. fol. 322.]
[Footnote d: Priscam illam Unionis, quasi morientis reipublicae extremam
vocem, auctoritatis et gravitatis plenam, regum insolentiae apertum vindicem
excitarunt, summa ac singulari bonorum omnium consensione. p. 669. It is
remarkable that such strong language should have been tolerated under Philip
II.]
[Footnote e: Zurita observes that the battle of Epila was the last fought in
defence of public liberty, for which it was held lawful of old to take up
arms, and resist the king, by virtue of the Privileges of Union. For the
authority of the justiciary being afterwards established, the former
contentions and wars came to an end; means being found to put the weak on a
level with the powerful, in which consists the peace and tranquility of all
states; and from thence the name of Union was, by common consent, proscribed.
t. ii. fol. 226. Blancas also remarks that nothing could have turned out more
advantageous to the Aragonese than their ill fortune at Epila.]
[Footnote f: Fueros de Aragon. De iis, quae Dominus rex. fol. 14, et alibi
passim.]
[Footnote g: Bianc. Comm. pp. 671, 811; Zurita, t. ii. fol. 229.]
