Creighton had promised him, he said, 15,000 {189} foreign troops, of

which he was to have command, and he asked in addition for a vast sum

of money and a personal guarantee against loss of fortune in any event.

Creighton also went to Guise and brought him into the business, and

Jesuit emissaries were to go to Rome and Madrid to crave aid from the

Pope and Philip. Mary and Mendoza were furious at the ineptitude of

Lennox and the priests, and Mary particularly that her name should be

used by them as being the head of the conspiracy. Creighton had no

authority whatever to promise 15,000 men, and the idea that Lennox was

to have command was absurd from a Spanish point of view. Philip was

alarmed too at the large number of persons who were now concerned in

the affair, and directed that no further steps should be taken. The

inclusion of Guise in the project soon produced its result. He wanted

naturally to take a large and prominent part, and travelled to Paris to

meet Tassis secretly at Beaton's house. He was full of far-reaching,

ill-digested plans; but his main desire evidently was to prevent

Spanish troops from being sent to Scotland, for fear, he said, of the

jealousy of the French. His idea was that a large mixed force should

be sent from Italy under the papal flag, whilst he made a descent with

Frenchmen on the coast of Sussex. But all these fine plans were soon

frozen under the cold criticism of Philip and de Granvelle. Philip, it

is true, did not yet think of conquering England for himself, but Mary

and James must owe the English crown to him alone, and be bound to

restore the close alliance between England and Spain, or the change

would be of no use to him: and this could hardly {190} be hoped for if

there were too many French and Italian troops concerned in the

business, or if Guise had the main direction of the enterprise.

Sir Francis Englefield was in Madrid as Philip's adviser on English

affairs, and both he and the numerous English Catholic refugees in

France, Flanders, and Spain soon made it clear that their national

distrust and enmity of the French was as keen as ever, whilst they

looked sourly upon any project which should make the Frenchified Scots

paramount over England. This feeling they were careful to urge upon

the Spaniards upon every occasion, and it is not surprising that Philip

at last came to believe their assurances that all England would welcome

a Catholic restoration if it came from their old friends the Spaniards,

and not from their old enemies the French.

From that time a change was apparent in Philip's policy. When he heard

of the Raid of Ruthven and the flight of Lennox he saw that English

Protestant intrigue had conquered, and that the Scottish-Catholic

enterprise was at an end for a time. Guise was to be flattered and

conciliated, but it is clear that henceforward Philip wished to confine

his (Guise's) attention to France. He was told how dangerous it would

be for him to leave France with his enemies, the Huguenots, in

possession, and was emphatically assured of Spanish support in his own

ambitious plans at home.

Guise was flattered, but he could hardly be expected to look upon

Scottish affairs from Philip's point of view. So he got one of his

adherents, young de Maineville, sent to Scotland to revive the idea of

the landing of foreign troops there. {191} Beaton, who was thoroughly

French, was just as anxious to keep the matter afoot in Paris, but

Philip had lost faith in the enterprise, and only kept up an appearance

of negotiation in order to maintain his hold upon the Guises and

prevent them from undertaking anything except under his patronage. De

Maineville soon got on intimate terms with James, but the Protestant

lords were holding him at the time, and Guise was informed by his agent

that the time was not now propitious for a Catholic descent upon

Scotland.

Guise thereupon came to the Spaniards in May, 1583, with a fresh plan.

He had decided, he said, to begin with the English Catholics.

Elizabeth was first to be murdered and the country raised, whilst he

landed on the coast, but Philip and the Pope must provide 100,000

crowns to pay for it. His plans, as usual, however, were vague and

incomplete, and the English Catholics, as well as Philip, looked coldly

upon them. Father Allen and the English exiles were in deadly earnest,

"and thought all this talk and intricacy were mere buckler-play."

Mendoza in Paris reports to Philip that "they suspected a tendency on

the part of the Scots to claim a controlling influence in the new

empire, and as the Scots are naturally inclined to the French, they

would rather the affair were carried through with but few Spaniards,

whilst the English hate this idea, as their country is the principal

one ... and they think it should not lose its predominance."

The English Catholics had a plan of their own which they urged upon

Philip. The English North Country was to be raised simultaneously with

the {192} landing of a Spanish force in Yorkshire, accompanied by the

Earl of Westmoreland, Lord Dacre, and other nobles, with Allen as

Nuncio and Bishop of Durham, and some of the extreme Catholic party,

even in Scotland, distrusting the French, favoured some such plan as

this under purely Spanish auspices.

Guise appears finally to have adopted a combination of this plan and

his own. The Spanish forces were to land at Fouldrey,

Dalton-in-Furness, Lancashire, whilst the English North Country was to

be raised, and the Catholic Scots on the border were to co-operate with

the Spaniards. Guise at the same time was to land in the south of

England with about 5,000 men. James VI., who had thrown himself into

Falkland and had assumed the reins of government, was in complete

accord with Guise about it, but the latter, as usual, was for pushing

matters on far too rapidly to please Philip. He (Guise) took upon

himself to send a priest named Melino to the Pope to ask him to furnish

some funds for the expedition and to explain the whole of the

particulars, and this deeply offended the King of Spain, who had no

idea of having matters arranged over his head by such a bungler as

Guise. The latter also sent Charles Paget in disguise to England in

August, 1583, to inquire as to the amount of support he might expect

when he landed on the south coast, and when Philip in due course saw

the instructions taken by Paget, it became clear to him that he must

somehow eliminate Guise from the project. On the margin of the

instructions Philip scribbled sarcastic remarks as to the futility of

Guise's projecting a landing and sending full {193} particulars of his

plans to the Pope _before_ he had ascertained what support he could

depend upon when he _did_ land. What opened Philip's eyes more than

anything else was that the English "were to be assured on the faith and

honour of Guise that the enterprise is being undertaken with no other

object or intention than to re-establish the Catholic religion in

England and to place the Queen of Scotland peacefully on the throne of

England, which rightly belongs to her. When this is effected the

foreigners will immediately retire from the country, and if any one

attempts to frustrate this intention _Guise promises that he and his

forces will join the people of the country to compel the foreigners to

withdraw._"

Well might Philip underline this and scatter notes of exclamation

around it, for it marked the parting of the ways, and showed that Guise

was more anxious for his family aggrandisement and personal ambition in

placing his kin upon the English throne than to serve the interests of

Spain by securing a close union between the two countries to the

exclusion of France, which was Philip's main object.

Guise was therefore told that he must not be precipitate, and the

matter was kept in suspense; but from that moment Philip decided to

undertake the matter alone. Allen and the English Catholics had never

ceased to urge upon him that his troops should be landed first in

England, and not in Scotland; and this now obviously suited Philip

best, as he was growing more and more doubtful about James' religious

sincerity. Another fact must have also influenced him greatly in the

same direction. His great admiral, Santa Cruz, had just brilliantly

{194} routed the French mercenary fleet in the service of the

Portuguese pretender at the Azores, and in the flush of victory had

written to Philip begging to be allowed to direct his conquering fleet

against England. "Do not miss the opportunity, sire," he wrote, "and

believe me I have the will to make you king of that country and others

besides." The grand old sailor made light of the difficulties, and

besought the King to let him go and conquer England in the name of God

and Spain. But Philip was not ready for that yet, and the idea was

only now being forced by events into his slow mind that perhaps he

might be obliged, after all, to claim England for his own, since the

English Catholics were for ever saying they wanted no French or

Scotsmen; and not a single English pretender was otherwise than

Protestant. So Santa Cruz was told that the King would consider the

matter, and in the meanwhile provide for eventualities by ordering

large supplies of biscuits, and by gradually sending men to Flanders.

At the same time he wrote to his ambassador in Paris, telling him in

confidence that he intended in due time to invade England from

Flanders, but no one was to learn this until the preparations had

advanced too far to be concealed; "and even then they (the French) must

be told in such terms as may not make them suspect an intention of

excluding the French from the enterprise."

But what is of more importance still, Philip gave directions in the

same letter to Tassis in November, 1583, that his own claim to the

English crown as a descendant of Edward III. should be cautiously

broached. If England was to remain in close {195} alliance with Spain,

it is difficult to see what other course Philip could have taken.

James as a successor to his mother was now out of the question, so far

as Spanish interests were concerned, for he was playing false all

round. No sooner did the Scots Catholics gain the upper hand than he

intrigued with Elizabeth and the Protestants for their overthrow, and

immediately the English and Protestant faction became paramount he

wrote beseeching letters for aid to Guise and the Pope. All this, of

course, Philip knew, for he knew everything, and although he intended

to put Mary Stuart on the throne, from this time he was determined that

her son should not succeed her.

The discovery of the Throgmorton plot and Guise's wild plans in

connection therewith threw the whole project into the background for a

time, and confirmed stealthy Philip in the idea that in future he must

manage matters himself. When Tassis, his ambassador in Paris, was

withdrawn from his post, in the spring of 1584, he wrote an important

memorandum to his master setting forth at length the arguments on both

sides for and against a landing in England or Scotland, by which it is

clear that the English and Scottish Catholic factions in France were

now bitterly at issue on the subject. As the English plan had gained

ground, James had once more considered it advisable to feign a desire

to become a Catholic; and Guise had again urged the adoption of the

plan of a landing in Scotland, with the invasion of England over the

Scots border, James himself being the figurehead. Tassis says that

such is the jealousy of the Scots in England that if an army crossed

the Border the {196} English Catholics themselves might resist it.

"The English," he says, "would not like to be dominated by Scotsmen,

and if the crown of Scotland is to be joined to theirs, they still wish

to be cocks-of-the-walk, as their kingdom is the larger and more

important one. On the other hand the Scots may be unduly inflated with

the opposite idea, so that imperfections may exist on both sides." As

Mary Stuart had drawn closer to Spain she had grown distrustful of

Beaton and Tassis, whom she considered too much wedded to French ideas;

but withal Tassis in this document very emphatically leans to the

English view, which he knew was that now held by his master. The full

plan for a great armada was evidently slowly germinating in Philip's

mind, but the vast expense had first to be provided for. When Guise's

envoy, Melino, had gone on his meddling mission to the Pope his

Holiness had offered to subsidise the expedition to a moderate amount,

and in answer to the second appeal from James VI. himself he had said

that he would stand by his previous promise. But this did not suit

Philip, and he let the Pope know promptly that he was willing to

undertake the great task for the glory of God and the advance of the

Church, but that the Pope must subscribe very largely indeed, "and must

find ways and means through his holy zeal to do much more than has yet

been imagined." He was also warned that Guise ought not to be allowed

to leave France, where he might serve the Catholic cause so much more

effectively than elsewhere. And so Guise and the Scotsmen are pushed

further and further into the background, Philip's aim being evidently

to raise civil {197} commotion in France, which was always easy enough

to do, and so to paralyse Henry III. and the Huguenots from helping

Elizabeth, whilst Guise would be powerless to promote the interest in

England of his kinsman James.

When it became apparent that the Pope was to have a large share in the

business the intrigue was transferred from Paris to Rome. Sixtus

himself was wise, frugal, and moderate, and had no great desire to

serve Philip's political aims, but only to signalise his own

pontificate by the restoration of England to the Church; but he was

surrounded by cardinals who represented the different interests.

Medici, D'Este, Gonzaga, Rusticucci, Santorio, and others represented

the French view, which was in favour of an arrangement with Elizabeth

and James, and desired to exclude Spanish influence from England.

Sanzio watched Guise's interests, whilst the Secretary of State

Caraffa, Sirleto, Como, Allen, and the Spanish ambassador, Olivares,

craftily forwarded Philip's wishes, the Pope himself being carefully

kept in the dark as to the ultimate object in view. The cause of

religion was invoked all through as being Philip's only motive;

inconvenient points were left indefinite, with the certainty that

Caraffa would interpret them favourably to Spanish designs; and by the

most extraordinary cajolery the Pope was induced to promise a million

gold crowns to the enterprise. He was not brought to this without much

haggling and misgiving on his part, and was very cautiously treated

with regard to Philip's intention to claim the English crown. "His

Holiness," writes Olivares, "is quite convinced that your Majesty is

not thinking of the crown of England {198} for yourself, and told

Cardinal D'Este so. I did not say anything to the contrary. He is

very far from thinking your Majesty has any such views, and when the

matter is broached to him he will be much surprised. However deeply he

is pledged to abide by your Majesty's opinion, I quite expect he will

raise some difficulty." Philip's constant orders were that the Pope

should be plied with arguments as to the inadvisibility of the heretic

James being allowed to succeed, and the need for choosing some good

Catholic to succeed Mary. The person that Philip had decided to make

sovereign of England was his favourite daughter, Isabel Clara Eugenia,

but this was not to be mentioned to the Pope. "But if at any time the

Pope moved by his zeal should talk about any other successor, you will

remind him, before he gets wedded to his new idea, that he is pledged

to agree to my choice in the matter."

In the meanwhile Allen, Persons, and the other English Catholics, were

ceaseless in their steady propagation of the idea of Philip's own right

to the crown, in consequence of the heresy of James, and the same view

was forced upon Mary Stuart by Mendoza and her English confidants in

Paris, all of whom were pensioners of Spain. At length Mary was

convinced, and wrote to Mendoza at the end of June, 1586, saying she

had disinherited her son in favour of Philip.

The full plan of the Armada had now assumed definite form. The King

was in possession of Santa Cruz's marvellously complete estimate of

cost and requirements of all sorts--a perfect monument of technical

knowledge and forethought; the {199} Pope was pledged to find about a

third of the necessary funds, and to leave Philip a free hand with

regard to the English succession and the time for the carrying out of

the enterprise; whilst Philip's position with regard to his claim to

the English crown was regularised by Mary's will in his favour.

Guise, Beaton, and the Scots had thus been routed all along the line,

but it was not to be supposed that they would accept their defeat

without a struggle. Their next move was within an ace of being

successful, and nearly changed the whole plan of the Armada. In July,

1586, Guise wrote to Mendoza that a plan he had long been concocting

had at last been brought to a head, and Beaton was commissioned to tell

Mendoza what the scheme was. A Scottish gentleman named Robert Bruce

had been sent to France with three blank sheets, signed respectively by

Lords Huntly, Morton, and Claude Hamilton, which Guise was to fill up

over the signatures with letters to Philip, appealing to him to aid the

Scots Catholics. They asked for 6,000 foreign troops for one year and

150,000 crowns to equip their own men, and in return promised to

restore Catholicism, release James and his mother, compel the former to

become a Catholic, and, most tempting of all, to deliver to Philip one

or two good ports near the English Border to be used against the Queen

of England. Bruce went to Madrid to lay the Scots' appeal before the

King, but when he arrived the failure of the Babington plot and the

collapse of the Catholic party in England was known to Philip, and he

had lost hope of effecting the "enterprise" except with {200}

overwhelming forces of his own. He did not wish, moreover, for Guise's

interference, and was coolly sympathetic and no more. And yet, in the

face of Santa Cruz's advice that he should secure some ports of refuge

for the Armada in the North Sea, the offer of the Scots lords to give

him two good Scotch harbours was one not to be lightly refused, so

whilst he sent Bruce back with vague promises, he instructed Parma and

Mendoza to report fully on the scheme. Parma was cold and

irresponsive. He would give no decided opinion until he knew what

Philip's intentions were. He was apparently jealous that he was not

taken fully into his uncle's confidence, and perhaps angry that his

son's claims to the English crown, which were better than those of

Philip and his daughter, were being ignored. But Mendoza, an old

soldier, the last pupil of Alba, as he called himself, was indignant at

Parma's doubts, and wrote to Philip an extremely able paper strongly

advising the invasion of England through Scotland, instead of risking

everything in a vast fleet, to which one disaster would cripple Spain

for ever. In prophetic words he foretold the possibility of the very

catastrophe which subsequently happened, and prayed Philip, ere it was

too late, to close with the Scots lords' offer. But Philip and Parma

were slow and wanted all sorts of assurances; so Bruce was kept in

France and Flanders for many months, whilst his principals lost hope

and heart. At last, when they were on the point of going over to the

Protestant side, on a promise of toleration for their religion, Bruce

was tardily sent back with 10,000 crowns to freight a number of small

boats at Leith to send over to Dunkirk for {201} Parma's troops, and

the 150,000 crowns demanded by the lords were promised when they rose.

During all this time the juggle in Rome was going on. Gradually Sixtus

was familiarised with the idea that Philip could not go to war for the

sake of putting heretic James on the throne; then Allen took care that

he saw the genealogical tree showing Philip's claim, and at last, in

the summer of 1587, it was cautiously hinted to him that, though Philip

would not add England to his dominions, he might perhaps appoint his

daughter to the throne. Sanzio, Mendovi and the French cardinals were

straining every nerve to persuade the Pope that the King of Scots might

be converted, and the Capuchin monk Bishop of Dunblane, amongst others,

went to Scotland for the purpose of forwarding this view.

The result of Bruce's appeal at Madrid was concealed from Guise, but of

course he learnt it indirectly, and was greatly indignant at his

exclusion from a project of which he was the originator. It was really

no secret, however, for in July, 1587, Father Creighton, sent by Guise,

arrived in Rome full of it; he, like other Scotsmen, being in favour of

James' conversion and his acceptance by Spain as King of England. But

Allen, Persons, and the rest of them, soon silenced Creighton, with

threats, cajolery, and money.

When Catharine de Medici got wind of the business she seems to have

thought it a good opportunity for getting rid of Guise and checkmating

Philip at the same time, and urged him (Guise) to go himself to aid his

kinsman James to the crown, in which case she would largely subsidise

him; and Guise himself was so incensed at the way {202} Philip had

treated him that he threatened to divulge the whole of Bruce's plot to

James, and very probably did so. Elizabeth, too, sent young Gary to

warn James of what was going on, so that when Bruce arrived in Scotland

the King was fully prepared for him; and although he appeared to

acquiesce in the hint from Bruce that the Spaniards would aid him to

avenge his mother, he was now surrounded by ministers favourable to the

Protestant interest, who saw that James had more to hope for from

Elizabeth than from Philip, and the matter was deferred indefinitely.

It was late in autumn when Bruce arrived in Scotland, too late in the

season to freight ships, and he suggested that in the following summer

ships for the transport of Parma's 6,000 men to Leith should be

freighted in Flanders. This was impossible--in fact, the long delay

whilst Philip and Parma were hesitating had ruined the project, which

was now public and consequently impracticable, though Bruce and the

Scottish lords continued to clamour for Spanish men and money until the

Armada appeared. And so again Philip's want of promptness lost this

chance, which might have saved the Armada.

By this time, late in the year 1587, the final plan of the Armada had

been settled. Parma had received his full instructions from Philip

some months before; all Spain and Catholic Christendom were ringing

with preparations for the fray, and the great fleet--or what Drake had

left intact of it on his summer trip to Cadiz--was mustering at Lisbon

under gallant old Santa Cruz, who was already dying broken-hearted at

the neglect of his wise precautions, at the confusion, waste, and

ineptitude which foreboded the crowning disaster.

{203}

With the subsequent mishaps and catastrophe this study is not

concerned. My object has been to show how circumstances drove Philip

to adopt the course he did, both with regard to the invasion itself and

his claim to the English crown; and to demonstrate that the ostensible

prime object of the Armada, the conversion of England to Catholicism,

although undoubtedly desired by Philip, was mainly used as a means to

his real end--namely, a close political alliance with England, without

which Spain was inevitably doomed to the impotence which eventually

fell upon her.

[Illustration: Tailpiece]

{205}

_A FIGHT AGAINST FINERY._

{207}

[Illustration: Headpiece]

_A FIGHT AGAINST FINERY._

(A HISTORY OF THE SUMPTUARY LAWS IN SPAIN.)

It is a curious reflection that whilst all the serious acts and

surroundings of civilised life have been rendered amenable to the law,

whilst the very instincts inherent in the nature of mankind have been

dominated and regulated by authority, utter failure has attended the

persistent efforts of rulers to cope with the trivial follies of

fashion, or to limit the vanity and extravagance of personal adornment.

For long ages men, and particularly women, have insisted upon making

themselves absurd and uncomfortable, at great cost and in an infinite

variety of ways, in obedience to dictates or impulses springing from

nobody knows where, and have only consented to forego each succeeding

caprice when the taste for it has worn itself out and has given place

to another, perhaps still more preposterous than its predecessor.

It has been from no fault of the rulers that they have {208} been

beaten in their fight with fashion, for they have tried their hardest

for centuries. Our Plantagenet and Tudor sovereigns made many attempts

to regulate the dress and adornment of their subjects, but the motive

which mainly prompted them was the desire to differentiate the classes

and prevent the humbler citizens from emulating, in appearance at

least, their social superiors. In a state of society which depended

upon the subjection of the majority by the privileged classes, this

motive was perfectly reasonable; as was also the alternative one of

protecting a particular national industry, which, in Tudor times

especially, often furnished a reason for the imposition of sumptuary

enactments; but both of these motives, from their very nature, were

necessarily more or less ephemeral and artificial, because, on the one

hand, the continual social development, the growing wealth of the

traders and the emancipation of the labourers made the classes

interdependent; and, on the other, the extended seaboard of England and

the maritime enterprise of the inhabitants made the protection of a

particular industry by prohibiting foreign competition impossible for

any great length of time. The attempted interference, therefore, of

English sovereigns with the dress of their lieges was intermittent and

spasmodic, and was, at a comparatively early period, admitted to be

useless.

Such, however, from various reasons was not the case in Spain. There

the fight against finery was kept up persistently for nearly six

centuries, and hardly a decade passed during that time without one or

more petty and ridiculous attempts being made to interfere with the

dress, food, {209} personal habits, and surroundings of the people.

The ostensible motives were usually different from those which operated

in England. The separation of the classes has never been so complete

in Spain as elsewhere in Europe, owing to the fact that from a very

early period in the history of the country all Christians were banded

together and dependent upon one another for protection against the

common enemy, the infidel. Manual industry, moreover, was never a

strong point with Spanish Christians, and the main reason for the

various attempts to exclude foreign goods was the dread that Spanish

gold would be sent out to pay for them. Nothing is more striking,

indeed, than the absolutely murderous effect upon Spanish industry

exerted by most of the paternal attempts at interference with trade,

but political economy was even more of a dead letter amongst that

nation of warriors than with our own ancestors. The earliest object of

the great mass of sumptuary laws in Spain was to restrict the dreaded

taste for luxury and splendour which was felt to be a characteristic of

the hated Moor, who had been conquered bit by bit by people who were

content to live roughly, feed frugally, and dress plainly. But with

victory came wealth, with peace came intermixture, and the subtle,

refined, Oriental blood, with its love of pomp and brilliancy,

gradually permeated the rough Gothic-Iberians, until its manifestations

alarmed rulers whose power still largely depended upon the

self-sacrificing frugality and hardy endurance of their subjects. Thus

it was that the attempt was made to keep people frugal and homely

whilst they were growing rich, and the tendency continued during all

the centuries that the struggle against Spanish luxury {210} went on,

although during the last three centuries of the period the original

motive had disappeared, and the usual excuse for the interference of

the King with the dress of his subjects was the desire to prevent them

from spending so much money upon themselves, in order that they might

spend more upon him.

But, whatever the motives may have been, the fight against extravagance

was carried on as persistently as fruitlessly until quite recent times,

and there exists a mass of information with regard to the dress and

manners of the people in the Spanish sumptuary enactments unequalled

elsewhere. The decrees usually took the form of a representation from

the Cortes to the sovereign, setting forth in a preamble the particular

abuses to be remedied, and then proposing a remedy which the sovereign

usually confirmed by what was called his "pragmatic sanction," and the

decree was then proclaimed and had the force of law. A large number of

these decrees or "pragmatics" of the highest interest will be found in

the British Museum manuscripts (MSS. Add. 9933 and 9934), and many more

are set forth in Sempere's "Historia de las leyes suntuarias" (Madrid,

1788), whilst the familiar and festive traditions of old Madrid teem

with quaint stories of ingenious evasions and jovial defiance of the

laws under the very noses of the sable-clad Acaldes and Alguaciles,

whose grave and solemn duty it was to clip lovelocks and measure frills

and furbelows.

The first vicious extravagance which seizes upon a hardy, simple people

who find themselves safe after a period of struggle is naturally that

of {211} gluttony; and the earliest sumptuary decrees of the Castilian

kings were directed against this particular excess.

In point of date the first decree extant in Spain of a sumptuary

character was that issued by Don Jaime (El Conquistador) of Aragon in

1234. He was extremely devout and ascetic himself, and was shocked at

the growing extravagance of his subjects, who having in his remote

mountain kingdom finally expelled the Moors, turned their attention to

tourneys, shows, and mimic warfare, at which great sums were spent both

in feasting and adornment. The Jews too, who at the time nearly

monopolised Spanish trade, encouraged the growing taste for the fine

stuffs and precious ornaments, from the sale of which they derived so

large a profit. So in 1234 Don Jaime decreed from his capital of

Zaragoza that no subject of his should sit down to a meal of more than

one dish of stewed, and one of roast meat, unless it were dried and

salted. As much game as they pleased might be eaten, on condition that

it had been hunted by the eater, but otherwise only one dish of game

might be served. No jongleur or minstrel might eat with ladies and

gentlemen, and no striped or bordered stuffs were to be worn. Gold and

silver, as well as tinsel, were prohibited, and ermine and other furs

were only to be used as a trimming to hoods and hanging sleeves. Jaime

since his childhood had been trying to crush the rising power of his

feudal nobles, and had already embarked on that long career of conquest

by which he subdued the Moorish kingdoms of Majorca and Valencia, so

that, although he himself was now safe in his mountain realm from

invasion, his decree was as much prompted by his {212} dread of the

softening effect of luxury upon his subjects as by his own rough,

simple tastes.

His kinsman of Castile was in worse case, for his dominions were more

open to the Moor. Saint Ferdinand conquered the splendid Moorish city

of Seville in 1248, where he died four years later, leaving his son,

Alonso the Wise, to succeed him as King of Castile. Oriental luxury

surrounded the frugal Castilians on all hands. The wealth of plundered

cities, the spoils of Moslem palaces were to be had for the grasping,

so that it was natural that extravagance in attire and eating should

soon threaten to soften the Christian conquerors dwelling in the midst

of the gentler, vanquished Moor. Alonso the Wise, in 1256, therefore

issued in Seville his first great sumptuary enactment. By it no

saddles were allowed to be covered or trimmed with plush. No gold or

silver tinsel was to adorn them, excepting as a border of three inches

wide, the saddle itself being of uncovered leather. Gold and silver

might be used on caps, girdles, quilted doublets, saddle-cloths or

table-covers, but not for draping shields or cuirasses. No jingling

bells were to be used as trimmings, except on the saddle-cloths at the

cane-throwing tourneys, but even then no device was to be embroidered

on the cloths. Bosses upon the shields were not to be allowed, but the

latter might be adorned with a painted or gilded-copper device. No

milled cloth was to be worn, nor were the garments to be cut and pinked

in fanciful shapes, or trimmed with ribbons or silk cords; the penalty

for infringing any of these regulations being the loss of one or both

thumbs by the offender, which of {213} course meant his disgrace and

ruin in the career of arms. Women were allowed a little more latitude,

but not much. They might wear ermine and otter fur to any extent, but

they were forbidden to adorn their girdles with beads or seed-pearls,

or to border their kirtles or wimples with gold or silver thread, or to

wear them of any other colour than white.

With regard to eating, Alonso the Wise held similar notions to those of

his neighbour Don Jaime, and ordered that his lieges should not have

upon their tables more than two dishes of meat and one of bought game,

and on fast days not more than two kinds of fish. As if recognising

the difficulty of enforcing this, the King solemnly undertook to comply

with his own regulations. Great extravagance had arisen in wedding

feasts, which were said (as in Oriental countries they do to-day) to

often ruin the contracting families, and Alonso made strict rules to

limit the excess in this direction. No presents of breeches were to be

given, and the entire cost of a wedding outfit was not to exceed 60

maravedis, whilst not more than five men and as many women might be

invited to the wedding banquet by each of the contracting parties. The

money spent upon marriage rejoicings, indeed, had become so great that

Alonso made this reform a great point in his decree, and provided

against evasion by strictly limiting the time during which the feast

might continue and wedding presents be given. Moors were said to be

dressing like Christians, and this was rigidly forbidden. They were to

wear no red or green clothes, and no white or gold shoes, and their

hair was to be parted plainly in the middle of the head, {214} with no

topknot, whilst they were enjoined to wear their full beard, which made

the distinction between them and the shaven-chinned Christians the more

marked. The penalties imposed for disobeying this decree of 1256 were

savage in the extreme, varying from loss of a thumb and a fine for the

first offence, to death for the third; but savage as they were, they

can hardly have been effectual, except perhaps in Seville, for only two

years later, in 1258, Alonso came out with a perfect code of conduct

for his subjects, far too minute to even summarise here, but of which

some specimens may be given, as they served as a model for subsequent

decrees for many years afterwards. Alonso had apparently got tired of

his self-denying ordinance and says the King may eat and dress as he

pleases, but agrees to limit his daily table expenditure to 150

maravedis a day, which in spending power would represent about £40 at

the present time at least. But he orders his "ricoshomes," ruling men,

to eat more sparingly and to spend less money. None of the members of

the royal household, squires, scribes, falconers, or porters, except

the head of each department, were allowed to wear white fur or

trimmings, or to use gilt or plated saddles or spurs. They were

forbidden to indulge in breeches of scarlet cloth, gilt shoes, and hats

of gold or silver tissue. Priests, it appears, had been reducing the

size of their tonsures and ruffling in fine colours, so as to be

undistinguishable from laymen, and they are sternly ordered to have

their tonsures the full size of their heads, gird themselves with a

rope, and eschew red, green, and pink garments. The old regulations

about eating were {215} repeated with the addition of one plate of meat

for supper, and the prohibition of fish on meat days. No man, however

rich, was to buy more than four suits of clothes in a year, and no

ermine, silk, gold or silver tissue, no slashes, trimmings, or pinked

cloth might be worn by men. Two fur mantles in a year, and one

rain-cape in two years was the limit of extravagance allowed to a man

in this direction; and the King alone was to wear a red rain-cape.

Lawn and silk for outer garments were confined to royalty, but the

"ricoshomes" might employ them as linings. No crystal or silver

buttons were to be allowed, nor was shaving or other signs of mourning

permitted, except to vassals who had lost their overlord and to widows.

Jews and Moors are cruelly treated in this decree, and their offences

and those of the poorer classes are to be punished by torture or death,

whilst those of the "ricoshomes" are left to the King's discretion.

Ermine, vair, and otter furs would appear to have been amongst the

principal articles of luxury, as the wearing of them is very strictly

regulated, and white furs seem to come next in estimation after them.

For ninety years these laws of Alonso the Wise were repeated and

reimposed with slight variations, but apparently ineffectually; since

in 1348 the Cortes of Alcalá made a presentment to Alonso XI. of

Castile bewailing the luxury and extravagance of the age, and proposing

a new code of sumptuary rules, which in due course the King confirmed.

These rules are very interesting because they demonstrate the great

strides which had been made in luxury, refinement, and civilisation

since the issue of the decrees {216} of Alonso the Wise nearly a

century before. No gold ornaments, no ermine or grebe-neck trimmings,

no seed-pearl embroidery, gold or silver buttons or wire, and no

enamels were to be worn except by nobles. No gold tissue or silk was

allowed except for linings, and no man below the rank of a knight might

wear vair fur or gilt shoes. Even the princes of the blood were

strictly limited in their dress, and were ordered to use tapestry cloth

or silk, but without gold or trimming of any sort. The Spartan wedding

regulations of Alonso the Wise had now become obsolete with the advance

of wealth, but the new rules, although wider, were to be enforced with

equal or greater severity. No gentleman was to give his bride within

four months after marriage more than three suits of clothes, one of

which might be of gold tissue, and one embroidered with seed-pearls to

the value of 4,000 maravedis, an enormous sum when we consider that

ninety years before 150 maravedis were the limit of the monarch's daily

expenditure, and that at this date, 1348, the value of a sheep was only

eight maravedis. The bride's trousseau is regulated down to the

smallest details, and the penalty for exceeding them is the loss of

one-quarter of his land by the too-generous gentleman who does so. The

decree sets forth that some women are wearing trains, "which are both

costly and useless," but in future they are to be confined to those

ladies who are travelling in a litter--a privilege limited to nobles.

All other women are to wear pelisses without trains, just reaching the

ground, "or at least not to drag more than two inches upon it." Ladies

who broke this rule were to be fined 500 maravedis. Great stress is

again laid upon the limitation {217} of extravagance in wedding feasts,

and burials, but the cost still allowed shows to what an excess luxury

had been carried. The bride's wedding clothes might cost 4,000

maravedis and the groom's outfit 2,000; and thirty-two people were now

allowed at the wedding feast. Much more latitude was permitted in the

use of seed-pearls, gold, and silver, to people above the rank of

knights, but the principal point to be noted in these decrees of Alonso

XI. is the incidence of the penalty. In the decrees of Alonso the

Wise, as has been shown, the most savage penalties were imposed upon

the poorer classes, whilst the punishment of the nobles was left to the

King's discretion. But much more even justice is dealt out by Alonso

XI. The nobles who break the law are to lose one-quarter of their

land, the knights one-third, the citizens 500 maravedis, whilst the

poorer classes for slight offences against the sumptuary rules are

condemned to lose the offending garment and its cost in money.

But whatever the penalty might be, extravagance, checked in one

direction, broke out in another, and Peter the Cruel, the son of

Alfonso XI., only a few years after the date of the decree just

mentioned, issued a complete sumptuary code in which the punishments

were positively ferocious. Fines, scourging, mutilation, and

banishment for first and second offences, and death for the third, were

imposed for the smallest infraction. Peter was particularly hard on

priests, who were said to be swaggering about with women, tricked out

in gay finery, and they were ordered in future to be sober and frugal,

wearing no ornaments of any kind, and only sad-coloured garb. Workmen,

too, were to {218} labour from sunrise to sunset for a fixed wage on

pain of punishment as severe as those imposed by our own labour laws.

The King, moreover, fixed stringently the cost which was to be incurred

by cities and towns in entertaining him when he visited them. The

dietary scale appears a pretty generous one from the point of view of

to-day, consisting as it does of 45 sheep at 8 maravedis each, 22 dozen

of dry fish at 12 maravedis a dozen, 90 maravedis worth of fresh fish,

with pork, grain, wine, &c.; the total value of the feast being limited

to 1,850 maravedis. Villages and nobles were not to spend more than

800 maravedis on a similar occasion.

In 1384 Peter the Cruel's nephew, John I. of Castile, was well beaten

by the Portuguese at the battle of Aljubarrota, and marked his sorrow

by issuing a decree prohibiting the use in any form of dress of silk,

gold, silver, seed-pearls, precious stones, or ornaments of any kind,

and everybody was ordered to don a simple mourning garb. When, four

years after this, John of Gaunt's daughter Catharine came to marry the

heir to the crown of Castile, she brought something else with her

besides the wide, pointed coif which Spanish widows wore for the next

three hundred years. Part of her dower consisted of great herds of

merino sheep, which crossed and thrived so well in Spain that the

coarse duffel, which had been the only native cloth, gave place in a

few years to beautiful fine woollen textures which could vie with those

of England and Flanders.

Intercourse between nations, the growth of wealth, the spread of

learning, and the advance of civilisation were moving with giant

strides. The soft arts of peace were practised with greater success

than ever, now {219} that the Moslem and the Christian were fast

merging into one people in Seville and Toledo, and the refinement of

the one was strengthened by the energy of the other. Beautiful stuffs,

stiff with gold and gems, gauzy silk, soft cloths, and fine linens, had

no longer to be brought from the Moors or the kingdoms across the sea.

Seville, Toledo, and Cordova could produce everything that the most

luxurious extravagance could desire, and the sumptuary laws for a time

were forgotten.

In 1452 the Cortes of Palenzuela presented a petition to John II.

asking that the stringent sumptuary code of Alonso XI. should be

re-enforced. The King, in reply, admitted that the law was a dead

letter, and that the extravagance in dress was greater than ever. He

says that gold tissue and silks are now ordinary wear, and that gold

trimmings and marten-fur linings are used even by people of low estate.

"Actually working women," he says, "now wear clothes that are only fit

for fine ladies; and people of all ranks sell everything they possess

in order to adorn their persons." Still the remedy proposed to him of

a revival of the stern code of a hundred years before he saw was an

impossible one, and the matter was held in suspense. He died soon

afterwards, and his feeble successor, Henry IV., was equally powerless

to stem the rising tide of industry and wealth with their natural

consequences.

In 1469, during the interregnum which followed the deposition of Henry,

the Master of Santiago issued a proclamation deploring the growing

extravagance of the age, and enjoining more moderation. Amongst other

similar things it says, {220} "Such is the pomp and vanity now general,

even amongst labourers and poor people in their dress and that of their

wives, that in appearance they seek to vie with persons of rank,

whereby they not only squander their own estates but bring great

poverty and want to all classes." But it was useless: and luxury went

unchecked until Ferdinand and Isabel the Catholic were firmly seated on

the twin throne of a united Spain and the last Moslem stronghold had

fallen. Then, in 1495, a "pragmatic" was issued which superseded all

previous obsolete sumptuary codes and established a new one, which

formed the model for similar decrees for the next two centuries.

Probably a more economically unwise decree under the circumstances was

never penned. All other previous pragmatics had forbidden the wearing

of extravagant apparel, and this did the same, especially severely as

regarded the precious metals; but it did more than this. It absolutely

forbade the introduction and sale of every sort of gold and silver

tissue, and rendered criminal the exercise in Spain of the industry of

embroidering or weaving gold, silver, and every other metal. The

Christianised populations of the south of Spain were greatly excelling

already in this industry. Their gold embroideries on velvet were in

great demand for church vestments and royal trappings all over Europe.

The taste for chivalrous splendour was not confined to Spain, and the

beautiful half-Oriental tissues of Andalusia were eagerly sought for in

every Court; gold was just beginning to find its way direct to Spain

from the new-found Indies, and if the industry had remained

untrammelled there was no reason why the country should not have

provided the world {221} with textile splendours to its own great

advantage. The ingenious, industrious people--for they were

industrious until the strangling of their handicrafts made them

idle--did their best to avert ruin. In 1498, only three years

afterwards, the Cortes made a presentment to the Queen saying that

things were worse than ever. It was true that gold brocade was no

longer made and the wicked waste of the precious metal was thus

avoided, but all sorts of strange devices and novelties were being

introduced in the manufacture of silks, whereby the people were tempted

to squander their money on useless finery. The Spanish silk factories

were then the finest in Europe, and great quantities of raw silk were

raised in the south-east of the Peninsula: and yet a "pragmatic" was

issued the next year, 1499, stringently forbidding the manufacture,

sale, or use of silk, except for lining. It was a staggering blow to a

flourishing industry, and in order to prevent total ruin a decree was

given that no raw silk from abroad was to be introduced into the

country, and only Spanish-grown silk used. But this was not enough,

and some of the silk-making provinces, reduced to desperation,

petitioned for the relaxation of the law. Their prayer was granted, as

if in irony, to the extent of allowing them to wear silk against the

law. But they did not want to wear silk, but to make it for other

people to wear, and their industry languished, never entirely to

recover.

By the time Isabel the Catholic had died the Spanish silk industry was

nearly at an end, and the skittish young Bearnaise princess, Germaine

de Foix, who succeeded her as old Fernando's wife, came too late to do

it much good. It is true she snapped {222} her slender fingers and

threw up her pretty chin at the straitlaced sumptuary laws, and

surrounded herself with silks and velvets, gold brocade and gems,

wherever she went; but unfortunately they mostly came from the looms

and workshops of Southern France, and gave no work to Spanish hands.

Money, of course, had to be sent out of Spain to pay for the finery,

and in 1515 the Cortes of Burgos complained of this to Jane the Mad,

Isabel's nominal successor, who thereupon issued a decree entirely

forbidding brocades and gold or silver embroidery and trimmings to be

worn at all, and strictly limiting the wearing of silk in any form to

people of rank.

But Jane's power was the merest shadow; Spain was in the throes of a

great struggle for its democratic institutions, which it lost, and no

notice was taken of poor Crazy Jane's decree. If she understood it she

probably had as little sympathy with it as her young stepmother, for

she had lived for years with her handsome husband Philip as head of the

most pompous and splendid Court in Europe, in busy Flanders, surrounded

by all the traditional magnificence of the house of Burgundy, and her

young son, the coming Emperor Chares V., Fleming as he was by birth and

instinct, was even less likely than she to revert willingly to the

simple, democratic, and patriarchal traditions of the Spanish Court.

He came to his new country with a whole host of Burgundian, Flemish,

and German nobles, whose taste for finery had never been checked; and

whatever decrees Charles might issue for the dress of his people, he

and his Court were the first to {223} disregard the letter and spirit

of his precepts. It is not to be wondered at, therefore, that they

were not obeyed for long together by any one else. The initiative,

moreover, did not come from the King or his courtiers, but from the

Cortes of Castile, who were naturally swayed entirely by Spanish ideas,

of which Charles had at this time, boy as he was, but little knowledge

or sympathy. This was so clearly recognised that when he was about to

leave Corunna in 1520 to assume the imperial crown, the Cortes held

there petitioned him at least to order that the sumptuary laws with

regard to silks, brocades, gold embroideries, and gold and silver lace,

should be strictly enforced during his absence from Spain, since they

saw that, with such a Court as his, they would not be enforced in his

presence. But the example of the Court had struck too deeply, and the

fury for splendour had now really taken hold of the Spaniards, who in

their ages of struggle had been so simple and homely.

In the pragmatic of 1537 it is said that during the Emperor's absence

the use of brocades, silks, and precious embroideries had increased

more than ever, and they are absolutely prohibited, and the rigid law

of 1498 again repeated. The preamble of the decree of 1537 says that

this law against gold embroidery was generally evaded by making the

gold lace and devices separately and then stitching them on to the

cloth, which cost much more even than embroidery would have done; and

the making of such adornments was consequently prohibited altogether.

Only nine years afterwards, in 1548, the Cortes of Valladolid made a

presentment to the Emperor saying that things {224} were worse than

ever, and the cost of clothes had been increased instead of decreased

by the ingenuity of tailors, who had taken to the plan of cutting out

the most elaborate patterns of coloured cloth with fine scissors and

sewing them on to the cloth garments, almost covering the latter with

delicate lace-like snippet work of applied cloth. In face of this

abuse the Cortes prayed the Emperor to forbid the use of any and every

sort of trimming, lace, or adornment on the garments, both of men and

women, which might give an excuse for the wicked tailors to charge

extravagant prices. Charles V. thought this too sweeping, but in 1552

he issued a "pragmatic" prohibiting the applied snippet work, and also

the use or manufacture of gold and silver lace and ornaments, the

wearing and making of velvets, silks, and satins being also rigidly

limited. Spain, flooded with the precious metals from the Indies,

richer perhaps in actual bullion than ever a country was before or

since, with home-grown silk in abundance, and the most deft and

tasteful weavers in the civilised world, was therefore obliged to

import its manufactured gold and fine stuffs from abroad, whilst its

own humbler citizens languished amidst the wealth they were not allowed

to earn. No decrees could prevent rich people from squandering their

money on dress, least of all when the Emperor and his Court were in a

constant blaze of magnificence.

Philip II., who in his later years usually wore black velvet trimmed

with jet or bugles, with the simple chain of the Golden Fleece about

his neck, was in his youth as splendid as his father; and the

preparations for his voyage to England to marry Mary {225} Tudor in

1554 included the making of more solid magnificence in the way of dress

than probably was ever made for one event in modern history. His son's

valet[1] was of a literary turn of mind, and has left us a precise

description of the dresses and trappings made for Philip and his army

of courtiers--the flower of Spain--in which the language of

extravagance is exhausted. Horse furniture, bed-hangings, canopies,

quilts, and upholstery, as well as dress, were all of satin or velvet

covered with gold embroidery and seed-pearls. There were twenty great

nobles, Spaniards, Flemings, and Italians, each with scores of

followers, all dressed in silks and satins with gold chains. Philip's

German bodyguard, even, of 100 troopers, wore facings of silk on the

gaudy red and yellow uniform of Aragon, and the common sailors of the

fleet had crimson silk caps with white plumes. Some few amongst

Philip's numerous suits may be mentioned as an example of the dresses

then in vogue, although many of his nobles appear to have fully

rivalled him in splendour. For some years, as has been shown,

gold-embroidered dresses had been strictly prohibited; and Muñoz, in

his description of the sartorial wonders prepared for the wedding,

mentions the revival of gold embroidery as a novelty. Prince Philip

had one suit consisting of surcoat, doublet, trunk-hose, and jacket of

crimson velvet covered with little lozenges formed of twisted gold

chains, the interstices being filled with a running sprig of silver

braid, the leaves formed of silver filigree. The surcoat was lined

with silver cloth of satin, embroidered in the same way. Another

surcoat was of grey satin covered with alternate stripes {226} of

applied gold chains and silver bugles. It was lined with stamped cloth

of silver, and the doublet, trunks, and jacket were of white satin

ornamented in the same way. Another "pretty suit," we are told,

consisted of a French surcoat of black velvet embroidered all over with

gold and silver bugles, the trunks and jacket being of crimson velvet,

and the doublet of crimson satin with the same embroidery. One of his

dresses consisted entirely of white silk velvet covered with a costly

embroidery of gold filigree; and another had a surcoat of black velvet

with a border of gold bugles and heavy twisted silver cords, the

garment itself being almost hidden under a closely embroidered running

sprig in gold, the leaves being filled in with silver filigree, and in

the spaces between the sprigs were slashes of white satin. With this

gorgeous coat went a suit of white velvet and gold. Precious stones

were worn at the neck and wrists, and gold chains and gems were looped

around the hat. Heavy gold chains rested on the shoulders, and arms

and housings flashed with riches inestimable, the spoils of the two

Indies.

This will give some faint idea of the fashions of a time when the

rulers were fruitlessly trying to repress extravagance in dress amongst

their subjects. Most of this finery was prepared in the city of

Valladolid, whence Philip left on his journey, and it is not entirely

surprising that in the following year 1555, the Cortes of Castile,

sitting in that place, boldly presented a petition asking that the

sumptuary laws should be done away with altogether. They say that they

are entirely a dead letter, and are consequently a scandal, as well as

{227} being useless and vexatious. Their petition was not granted, for

Philip and his father still thought that all the growing wealth of the

country should come to them, instead of being used for decking the

undistinguished persons of private citizens.

There had been no finer flax than that of Galicia, and no better linens

than those made from it, but the trade had been crippled by the

sumptuary restrictions, and the business had already fallen into the

hands of Flemings and Frenchmen, who got paid for their stuffs with

Spanish gold. The wool industry was still more cruelly treated.

Thanks to the merino stock, the manufactory of fine cloths, serges, and

friezes had been very prosperous, and Spain could, and did, export

these textiles largely; but in 1552 the export of such goods was

strictly prohibited, and even wool in the fleece might not be sent out

of the country except on condition that for every twelve sacks exported

two pieces of foreign cloth and one bale of foreign linen should be

introduced to prevent the export of gold.

The silk growers of Valencia and elsewhere had been ruined, but the

looms remained, and the weavers attempted to obtain raw silk from Italy

and France. The introduction of raw silk was thereupon forbidden, and

most of the weavers went the way of the growers, to idleness and ruin,

or across the seas to the Indies. The Cortes of 1555 saw the evil that

was being done and, as usual, made a presentment on the subject. They

pointed out the paralysis of Spanish industry and the large sums of

coin sent out of the country to pay for French and Flemish linens, and

ascribed the evil to its secondary and not its primary reason. They

{228} say flax-growing is neglected and decayed, and suggest that

public lands, where suitable, should be cultivated, and every landowner

forced to plant a certain proportion of flax on his estate. It was

useless and absurd, of course, as the sumptuary laws limiting the

making or wearing of lawns and fine linens had killed the industry, and

the coarse linens were still spun and woven at home; so nothing came of

it.

But the acme of absurdity and political perverseness was reached in the

Cortes of 1552, which presented a petition begging that the export of

manufactured goods of all sorts to the new Spanish empire in America

should be strictly prohibited. They say that the people there are

getting their money so easily and becoming so rapidly rich, that they

buy such great quantities of Spanish goods as to raise the prices in

the Peninsula, "_whereby we who work here cannot live._"

The Cortes of 1560 reported that the nation was fast being ruined by

extravagance in dress, and begged that a "pragmatic" should be issued

forbidding every sort of ornament or tissue in which metal entered, and

strictly limiting the trimming of garments to a plain piping round the

edge. This pragmatic was duly granted, but during the next few years a

considerable change was seen. Philip had married the beautiful young

French Princess Elizabeth of Valois, who had been brought up with Mary

Stuart in that light-hearted court that Brantome described so well.

She had no patience with the rigid puritanism and peddling interference

of stern authority with beauty's armoury, and French fashions for

ladies became general. A "pragmatic" {229} was published in 1563,

ostensibly re-enforcing that of 1537 (which, as has been shown,

prohibited the use of gold lace or embroidery in any form), but really

relaxing the regulations greatly, for the benefit of the ladies. They

might in future wear sleeves of point lace in gold or silver, gold or

silver gauze, or silk shot with gold, and their jackets might be made

of similar stuffs, whilst they might deck their coifs, wimples,

stomachers, and under-linen with as much gold as they pleased. Gold,

silver, or crystal buttons could now be worn, but not on the skirt, and

only on the head, bosom, bodice, and sleeves; whilst the hat might be

trimmed with gold gimp. Some concessions were made to their spouses as

well, for they were permitted to clothe their nether limbs in silk

hose, and their trunks might be slashed and trimmed with silk, and,

generally speaking, the wearing of silk was greatly extended.

Contemporary writers are full of the great extravagance in dress which

followed this period. Moncada says that it was not uncommon for a

man's dress to cost 300 ducats a suit, whilst the abuse of precious

stones, both by men and women, was carried to a ridiculous excess.

Contemporary portraits show that things were bad enough in this respect

in England at the time, but they were much worse in Spain.

Only one year after the proclamation of the pragmatic just mentioned,

namely, in December, 1564, another elaborate decree was issued, on the

pretext that the previous one had left several points in doubt, and the

authorities had consequently been lax in enforcing it. The decree of

1563 had said that {230} one year's grace was to be given for garments

already made, and this concession had served as a loophole for the

evading the regulations altogether. The authorities are therefore

ordered strictly to enforce the decree; but the opportunity is taken of

elucidating doubtful points and still further modifying the severity of

the orders. It is now explained that the prohibition of gold, silver,

and silk stitching, gimp, or trimming of any sort on the garments,

referred only to applied trimmings, and was not meant to include the

weaving of gold or silk threads or stripes in the textures, or even the

sewing of stripes of silk or leather on to the garment, which stripes

might be bordered by a piping and held by two rows of ornamental

backstitch on each side, provided that no other sort of adornment is

used. Silk gimp even may be applied on garments for indoor wear,

whilst silk frogs may be sewn on to overcoats and travelling cloaks.

Fringes were also allowed on horse furniture and harness now, and

swordbelts and baldricks might be worn as rich as the taste and

extravagance of the owners cared to make them. Some doubt is said to

exist as to the legality of stuffing the trunk-hose with baize to

extend them, and whether the slashes might be lined with baize for the

same purpose, and these practices are strictly forbidden, "nor may

piping be inserted like farthingales, nor may threads, nor wires, nor

gummed silk be employed to extend the trunks unduly, as we are informed

has fraudulently been done." The previous pragmatic had imposed the

same penalties for infraction of the decree by people in their own

houses as in public, which appears to have caused much vexation by the

{231} invasion of domiciles by inferior officers, on pretext of

searching for forbidden garments, and the right of search was now

abolished.

An attempt to shame ladies into obeying the law was made for the first

time, of many, in these pragmatics of 1563-4 by giving to women of bad

character the right to deck themselves in prohibited finery in their

own houses. But Madrid was already commencing upon the downward career

which made it for more than a century the most dissolute place in

Europe, and women of rank even were proud of their effrontery, so that

no attempts to induce them to obey the law by appeals to their modesty

ever succeeded. The brazen-faced impudence of the Madrileñas, which so

shocked foreigners in the seventeenth century, still remains as a

cherished tradition of the fast-disappearing race of _majas_ and

_manolas_ of Lavapies and other low neighbourhoods of the capital, and

is encouraged in them as a national trait by their social betters.

In 1568 Philip lost both his beautiful young wife and his only son.

Defeat and disappointment met him on all sides, and his gloom, deepened

by fanaticism, became heavier as the years rolled on. Henceforward he

and his Court dressed in black, and the fashions of his people followed

him, to the extent of relinquishing almost entirely the use of gold

tissues and embroidery on their garments. But poor as was the King's

exchequer, and in despite of Drake and the buccaneers, gold still

poured into Spain from the Indies, and luxury, if checked in one

direction, was certain to break out in another. Coaches had been

brought {232} by Charles from Flanders when he came to Spain, and by

the end of the sixteenth century a perfect rage for coaches had seized

upon the people of the capital--a form of extravagance which for the

next century at least was carried to a ridiculous excess, and even now

remains the principal foible of the Madrileños. The new taste was

supposed to threaten the art of horsemanship and the breed of horses;

so for some years pragmatics were issued ordering that no coach or

wheeled litter or chariot was to be drawn by less than four horses. To

encourage men to ride on horseback, doctors, lawyers, and licentiates

of universities were authorised in 1584 to use long housings to their

steeds, and whilst mules were still to be housed with plain harness,

horses might be decked with velvet saddles, gold and silver fringes,

gimp and nails, and made as smart as possible, in order to encourage

their use.

In 1593 Camillo Borghese was sent to Madrid by the Pope, and has left

behind him for our enlightenment a minute account of the fashions of

his day,[2] by which we may see the effects that had been produced by

the "pragmatics" we have described. "The dress of this country," he

says, "is as follows. The men wear long breeches, with a surcoat and

hat, or else a cloak and cap, as it would be a great breach of decorum

with them to wear a hat and cloak together. This costume would

certainly be very pretty if the breeches were not cut so long as to be

disproportionate. Some men have taken to wearing hose in the Seville

style, which they call {233} galligaskins, and with these it is proper

to wear a cloak and hat instead of a cap. The ladies, like the men,

usually dress in black, and have a veil round their faces like nuns,

their heads being enveloped by their mantillas in such a way that their

faces are hardly visible. Indeed if it were not for the pragmatic

issued by the King on the subject they would still cover their faces

completely, as they used to do a few years ago. When they do not wear

these veils over their faces, they have on collars with enormous ruff

pleats. They are naturally dark-skinned, but the use of paints is so

common that they all look fair, and though small in stature their high

pattens make them look tall, so that it may be truly said that all

Spanish ladies turn themselves from little and dusky to big and bright.

The main street of Madrid would be fine if it were not unutterably

filthy and almost impassable on foot, and the better class of ladies

are always in carriages or litters, whilst the humbler ones ride on

donkey-back or pick their way through the mire. They (the ladies) are

naturally impudent, presumptuous, and off-handed, and even in the

street go up and talk with men whom they do not know, looking upon it

as a kind of heresy to be introduced properly. They admit all sorts of

men to their conversation and are not a bit scandalised at the most

improper proposals being made to them.

"The gentlemen now rarely ride on horseback but often go in carriages.

They are preceded in the streets by a group of pages and a couple of

servants they call lacqueys, the pragmatic not allowing them more,

although the grandees may be {234} attended by four. The pragmatics

only allow saddle cloths to be worn from October to March, but for the

rest of the year velvet saddles may be used. The one pastime of these

people is to drive up and down the Calle Mayor (High Street) from

midday to midnight."

The good churchman was much shocked at the effrontery of the people and

their filthy habits, but this branch of the subject is foreign to the

present article. Rough magnificence, side by side with boorish

rusticity, seems to have been the characteristic of the Spain of Philip

II. In the same year that Borghese wrote, a very severe pragmatic had

been issued prohibiting the use of silver ornaments on household

furniture, which, it says, had reached a pitch of extravagance which

could no longer be endured. Decrees were issued in 1586, 1590, and

1594, which are interesting as showing that the inevitable extravagance

of dress had now turned into the direction of the starched ruff. "No

man," says the last-named pragmatic, "may wear either at his neck or

wrists on any sort of ruff or frill, fixed or loose, any trimming,

fringe ravelling, or netting, starch, rice, gums, rods, wires, gold or

silver threads, or any 'alchemy' or anything else to extend or support

them, but only a plain Holland or linen ruff with one or two little

pleats, on pain of forfeiture of shirt and ruff and a fine of 50

ducats." Great resistance was offered to this, and it was found,

somehow or other, whether by "alchemy" or what not, the "lettuce-frill"

ruffs still stood stiffly from the neck, and the Council of State

gravely considered the matter, with the result that the decree of 1594

insists upon the law being {235} enforced, the ruffs to be as

described, and not more than three inches wide from the band to the

hem, the colour to be pure white. The penalties for infraction were

tremendous--for a first offence, 20,000 maravedis fine, for the second,

40,000, and for the third, 80,000 and a year's banishment.

This was not by any means the only sumptuary law promulgated in this

year of 1594; a much relaxed code of dress was issued with regard to

gold and fancy silk textures, of which the universal use of unadorned

black for so many years had greatly decreased the manufacture in Spain.

Women were now allowed to wear fine cloth or silk jackets, and cover

the seams thereof with gold or silver braid or scrolls, whilst their

dresses and mantles might be trimmed as profusely as they pleased with

the same ornaments. Doublets, jackets, and waistcoats were now allowed

to be of quilted silk, satin, or taffety; whilst the trunk hose of the

men might be slashed, and double-stitched at the edge of the slashings.

The said breeches, moreover, might be stiffened by a single thickness

of baize and all the fine stuffs used for gentlemen's garments could

now, for the first time for many years, be stamped with patterns. New

and more severe measures were adopted at the same time to keep up the

breed of horses, which animals were thought to be almost in danger of

extinction, as horsemanship was less than ever indulged in, and mules

were preferred for drawing the coaches.

In the same year, 1594, a curious pragmatic was proclaimed dealing with

the extravagant abuse of honorific titles. It commences in the King's

name by saying that, although it is unnecessary to {236} make rules for

himself or his family, he will begin at the top for regularity's sake.

The King must be addressed in writing simply as "Sir" at the head of

the letter, which must end with "God guard the Catholic person of your

Majesty," at the bottom. The heir to the crown was to be addressed in

the same way, but with "Highness" substituted for "Majesty," the

Princes of the blood being given the style of Highness, but "his

Highness" alone standing for the heir to the crown. The rest of the

Princes were to be addressed on the outside of a letter, "To his

Highness the Infante Don So-and-so." The titles "Excellency" and

"Illustrious Sir," which had become very general forms of courtesy,

were forbidden, and "Most Reverend Sir" was only to be applied to

Cardinals and the Primate of Spain, the Archbishop of Toledo. The

highest grandees, bishops, and members of the Council of State were in

future to be addressed by the inferior title of "Señoria," or Lordship,

whilst, out of courtesy and at the option of the person speaking or

writing, the same title could be given alone to Marquises, Counts,

Presidents of Councils, and Grand Commanders. All letters of every

kind were ordered to begin at the top with a cross, and then to state

the business without any address or name, ending with "God guard your

lordship"--or other title--and the date, place, and signature of the

writer. Absolutely no further compliment was to be permitted, no

matter what the relationship or rank of the parties. As a further

attempt to enforce simplicity, the same pragmatic provides that in

future, on pain of a fine of 10,000 maravedis, no coronet may surmount

any coat of arms, except {237} such as are borne by Dukes, Marquises,

and Counts.

The proclamation of this pragmatic caused a dreadful fluttering of the

dovecotes of the Calle Mayor. "Liars' parade" (the raised terrace

before the church of St. Philip), the favourite lounge of the gilded

youth, rose in revolt, the cadets of the Cordobas, the Mendozas, the

Maquedas, the Leivas, the Manriques, and the rest of them, who had been

called "Excellencies" and "Lordships" from their cradles, turned like

the worm at last. Dress without gold they might, but they, the sons of

Dukes, to be addressed with no more ceremony than dustmen--perish the

thought! that they would not stand. So they and the rest of the

rufflers, led captains, kept poets, bullies, and blacklegs, swept down

the Calle Mayor carrying the grave Alcalde and all before them. Shops

were shut, water was boiled to throw out upon the base "Corchetes," who

dared to call such gallants plain "Mister," and the gloomy recluse in

the Alcazar at the end of the street himself heard the row. When he

was told the cause of it, he only remarked, so the chronicles say:

"Bah! what does it matter to me what they are called? Let them be

Lordships, or what they will, so long as they serve me well." And the

pragmatic thus died on the day it was born, for no attempt was ever

made to enforce it, and "Señorias" in the Calle Mayor remained as

plentiful as blackberries in an English hedgerow.

The isolation of Philip II. in his gloomy old age, together with the

relaxation of the enactments already mentioned against the use of gold

and silver tissues, had allowed luxury in dress {238} practically to go

unchecked during the last years of the sixteenth century, and when the

King died, in 1598, he left Spain, and particularly the capital, in a

perfect frenzy of prodigality. The most brazen dissoluteness

accompanied the blindest religious fanaticism; the exchequer was

bankrupt, the fields untilled, the aforetime busy workshops of the

south silent and abandoned, the people starving or flocking across the

seas in search of the easily won gold that was ruining them; and when

the coveted gold came to the few who survived the pursuit, it was

lavished in insensate waste on the adornment of their outer

persons--for they always fed frugally in that lean land--and most of

the wealth left the country as fast as it entered it, the idleness it

engendered being its net result to the country that won it.

For the next hundred years the same process went on. The monarch of

Spain and the Indies was reduced to beg his subjects in the name of

charity to provide food for himself and his family, whilst the mines of

Peru and Mexico were sending millions. The splendour of the polished

Court of Philip IV. was only rivalled by that of his nephew, the Grand

Monarque, but it was soaked to the core in sloth and squalor, whilst

the humbler people found the purchasing power of gold grow less and

less as the metal poured in and the workers, dazzled by wealth so

lightly won, ceased to produce commodities for consumption. Philip

III. was a narrow bigot without his father's industry or intellect, but

he was well-meaning and sorely beset, and was unequal to the propping

up of the great empire into which his father's narrow and halting

policy had {239} introduced the dry rot. The regulation of dress,

however, and the repression of profane extravagance was just the task

which appealed to his tastes and sympathies, and he set about it as

soon as he mounted the throne.

His pragmatic of 1600 was a new departure in many things and was the

pattern of all similar enactments for the next hundred years. It is

very minute, but a few of its provisions are worth preserving, as they

throw much light on the tastes of the time. The King in his preamble

sets forth that he is informed that the sumptuary pragmatics are quite

disregarded, and seeing that the great excess and extravagance in dress

constitutes a national scandal which must be moderated, he has

conferred with his wisest councillors and has decided to issue a new

pragmatic which shall supersede all previous ones.

To begin with, the following sweeping order is given: No one of

whatever rank, except the King and his children, shall wear any sort of

brocade or cloth of gold or silver, or stuff shot with gold or silver,

or silk in which metal is woven. No cord, gimp, ornamental stitching

or quilting, either of silk or metal, is to be permitted, excepting on

religious vestments and uniforms, and no precious stones or pearls are

to be worn on housings or accoutrements in any shape. There is an

absolute prohibition of the employment of lute-string, twist, ruchings,

flat braid, cording, chainlets, crewels, cross-stitching,

through-stitching, tangle trimming, puffs, and any sort of bead or

steel trimmings; and the following dress is alone prescribed: The cape

or other over-garment may be {240} of any sort of silk with stripes, on

each edge of which may be an ornamental stitching. Surcoats and

ropillas (a sort of half-tight over-jacket with double sleeves, the

outer ones hanging loose from the shoulder) may be also of silk and

trimmed in the same way, and, if desired, a piping of another sort of

silk, but not the same, may be put between the stripes. The inside of

the capes may have similar stripes of silk, satin, or taffety, but not

velvet. Shoulder capes may be made of velvet, and the hoods of

riding-cloaks or rain-capes may be lined with the same. Silk gimp and

frogs may be sewn on to duffel cloaks, &c. The trunks may be worn of

any kind of silk, and each slashing may be edged with a velvet or silk

piping and an "eyelash" border. If the slashing is a wide one this

edging may be worn on both sides of it, but if otherwise only on one

side. The slashings may be lined with taffety. Silk gimp or braid of

any sort may be worn on the trunks excepting lutestrings or crewels.

Galligaskins may also be made of silk, but with no trimming but a row

of gimp on each side and at the opening. Dressing-gowns for women and

men may be of any material or fashion, so long as gold or silver is not

used. Doublets, ropillas, or trunks made of satin may be ornamented by

silk stitching of any colour, but on no account may the stuff be

pinked, ravelled, or fringed. The rules generally apply to women as

well as men, but the former are allowed to wear jackets of light cloth

of gold or silver, which may be trimmed with a braid of the same over

the seams, and the whole jacket may be covered with "whirligigs" or

scrolls of gold or silver, so long as there is no working in the stuff

{241} itself. The frills and flounces of these garments may also be

ornamented in the same fashion. Hats, belts, baldricks, &c., were all

treated in the same way; gold or silver gimp, braid, and lace were

allowed to be sewn on, but not embroidered or woven in, the texture.

A rather curious point in this decree of 1600 is the distinction in it

of different classes of citizens. Thus women of known evil life were

allowed to wear what they liked inside the houses, but were to conform

to the law in the streets; pages might dress in silk jackets, coats,

trunks, and caps, but their capes were to be of cloth or frieze; no

lackeys were to have silken clothes or velvet scabbards, but they were

allowed to wear taffety caps. The punishments for the breaking the

orders seem severe but unequal. Offending wearers were to lose the

peccant garment and pay a sum equal to its value for pious uses, but

tradesmen who made or sold the goods were to be condemned to four

years' exile and a fine of twenty maravedis for a first offence, double

the punishment for a second, and the pillory and ten years' exile from

Spain for a third. All this sounds very severe, but there were plenty

of ways out of it. For instance, garments already made might be worn

for four years by men and six by women, although they were not in

accordance with the law. This pragmatic was proclaimed with the usual

ceremony by one of the Alcaldes de Casa y Corte with the sound of drum

and trumpet in the High Street of Madrid on the 8th of June, 1600. The

month must have been a busy one for the dignified officials in

question; for during the first fortnight of it decrees regulating

almost every conceivable subject were issued. The {242} rigid and

unpopular decree about courtesy titles was superseded, and nearly

everybody of position might now be called Señoria. No gold or silver

in any form was to be used in furniture or household decoration, "as

the King is shocked at the waste of the estates of his subjects in such

superfluities, and considers it high time that the money were employed

in useful and necessary things." Velvet or silk might be employed in

upholstery, but no gold or silver except a gold fringe on the edges.

The same rule applied to the lining of carriages and litters, but no

silk was to be used on the outside of vehicles.

The regulation of jewellery was just as minute and severe, and to judge

from that which was in future to be allowed, the excess in this respect

must have been very great, since after pages of prohibitions with

regard to the fashions of jewellery, and the limitation of enamels and

precious stones, men were still allowed to wear as many rings as they

liked, chains and girdles of gold pieces, sets of cameos mounted in

gold, and strings of pearls in their caps. The use of silver plate is

also much limited, but still side-saddles might be made of silver, if

plain, and the harness and horse-cloths covered with the same metal.

Here, again, the same loophole for evasion was given; for all things

already made were exempt if registered within six months.

Attempts were made at the same time, as on many subsequent occasions,

to suppress the ostentatious promenading up and down the Calle Mayor,

which grew more scandalous as the years went on, until it reached its

apogee in the reign {243} of Philip IV., and for which the taste has

never yet quite died out. No women of loose life were to promenade in

coaches, nor might coaches be hired for the purpose on pain of

confiscation. No person but a grandee might have more than two torches

carried before him under penalty of one hundred ducats fine, and if any

person hired a lackey by the day, or for less than a month, he was to

be put in the pillory and exiled for four years. The reasons for these

regulations will be well understood by those who have studied the

characteristic picaresque novels of the period, and have smiled at the

amusing subterfuges adopted by impecunious scamps to pass themselves

off as noble hidalgos, the better to prey upon their fellow-creatures.

Amongst other things Philip III. in his youthful zeal tried to deal

with the vexed subject of ruffs. He made no attempt to stand against

starch any longer--indeed, to judge from his portraits, no one ever

wore such stiff or extensive ruffs as he did himself, but he sternly

draws the line at trimming. There must be no lace edges or ravellings;

they must be pure white, with two little pleats only, and not more than

4½ inches wide, half as wide again as had been allowed by his father.

For the next few years pragmatics positively rained in Madrid,

altering, restricting, relaxing this or the other detail of the various

decrees; but all to no purpose apparently, for in 1611 Philip came out

with another long proclamation, saying that the extravagant abuse of

dress being worse than ever, he has consulted discreet experts and has

decided to alter the rules. The use of gold and silver thread {244}

and foil, and of coloured silks, is more restricted than ever, the only

exceptions being for church vestments and the dresses of officers

actually engaged in war. In other respects, however, the trimmings

allowed appear to be exceedingly elaborate, and in the pragmatic of

1611 about a dozen different specimen trimmings of trunks alone are

described with all the finnicking minuteness of a modern Court

dressmaker's bill; the sum total of it all being that the employment of

silk, velvet, and other fine stuffs, stamped and plain, was now almost

unrestricted, whilst bullion was more severely forbidden than before,

except for ladies' jackets and a few of their trimmings.

Another desperate attempt was made in the same year to restrict the

unprofitable idling in the streets with carriages and an order was

issued that no new coaches were to be made without a license from the

President of the Council, and no man was to ride in a coach without

leave, "as the King is informed that gentlemen are forgetting how to

ride." Women also are to refrain from covering up their heads and

faces, in order that they may be seen and recognised, and they may only

be accompanied by their husbands, fathers, sons, or grandfathers. The

girls of a family may ride in a coach without the mistress of it, and

the owners of coaches may be accompanied by a friend, but with this

exception no coach is to go out without its owner, and may not be lent,

exchanged, or sold without special license.

Ruffs had now apparently become general with all classes, as a

pragmatic was issued in 1611, saying that, notwithstanding the former

prohibition of the {245} use of long-lawn and muslin for ruffs, frills,

and collars, poor people would insist upon wearing them, and they

consequently might now be made of those cheaper materials as well as of

fine linen.

In March, 1621, Philip III. died, leaving luxury and extravagance in

his capital more rampant than ever, and Philip IV., a mere boy, at once

set to work to grapple the evil with as much confidence as if he were

the first to attempt it. If economy had ever been needed it was so

now, for the public treasury was empty, the people ruined with

oppressive taxation, ecclesiastical extortion and official peculation,

and the country was rapidly becoming depopulated. A curious pamphlet

is still in existence which contains a series of exhortations addressed

to the King in the year of his accession by a noble member of the

Cortes of Castile, setting forth the various evils from which the

country was suffering, and proposing remedies for them.[3] There is

much plain speaking and boldness on many matters therein, and, amongst

others, on the eternal question of sumptuary extravagance. The

representation on this subject has so direct a bearing upon what has

already been said as to the inoperativeness of the pragmatics, that

some of it is worth transcribing.

"Your subjects spend and waste great sums in their abuse of costly garb

with so many varieties of trimmings that the making costs more than the

garments themselves, and as soon as they are made there is a change of

fashion and the money has to be spent over again. When they marry, the

{246} vast wealth they squander on dress alone ruins them, and they are

in debt for the rest of their lives; and although this expenditure may

be voluntary, it has become, so to speak, obligatory, and such is the

excess that the wife of an artisan nowadays needs as much finery as a

lady, even though she and her husband have to get the money for it by

dishonest means, to the offence of God. Many weddings, indeed, are

prevented by the excessive cost and the vassals are therefore unable to

serve your Majesty as they ought. They are unable to pay their debts,

the costs incurred in the recovery of which still further reduce their

fortunes.... As for collars also, the disorder in their use is very

great, for a single one of linen, with its making and ravelling, will

cost over 200 reals, and six reals every time it is goffered, which at

the end of the year doubles the cost of them and much money is thus

wasted. Besides this, many strong young men are employed in goffering

them, who might be better employed in work necessary for the

commonwealth or in tilling the soil. The servants, too, have to be

paid higher wages in respect of the money they have to spend in

collars, which consumes most of what they earn, and a great quantity of

wheat is wasted in starch, which is wanted for food. In addition to

this, the fine linens to make these collars are brought from abroad,

and money has to be sent out of the country to pay for them. With

respect to coaches, great evil is caused and offence given to God,

seeing the disquiet they bring to the women who own them, as they never

stay at home but leave their children and servants to run riot with the

bad example of the mistress being always {247} abroad. The

praiseworthy and necessary art of horsemanship too is dying out, and

those who ought to be mounted crowd, six or eight of them together in a

carriage, talking to wenches rather than learning how to ride. It must

be evident how different gentlemen must grow up who have all their

lives been rolling about in coaches instead of riding, besides which

the breed of horses is deteriorating and money is being squandered by

the keeping of coaches often by people of moderate means who can ill

afford it but who are over-persuaded by their wives, who say that

because So-and-so, who is no better off than they, have a coach they

must have one as well, and so the bad example spreads."

Don Mateo proposed some very drastic remedies, and, whether in

consequence of this or not, the King and his favourite, the masterful

Count-Duke of Olivares, put their heads together during the first few

weeks of the reign, and came out with tremendous series of pragmatics

repeating the most stringent provisions of the decree of 1611 with

regard to the use of gold or silver, either in dress, furniture,

saddlery, or upholstery. No trimmings were to be allowed of any sort,

and no silk capes, cloaks, or overalls were to be worn, cloth, frieze,

and duffel being substituted in those garments. Above all Don Mateo's

suggestion about the ruffs was adopted. No person was permitted, on

pain of the pillory and exile, to pleat or goffer linen in any shape.

Starch was placed in the _index expurgatoris_ again, and ruffs were to

be for ever suppressed in favour of the large, square, flat Walloon

collar, which fell over the shoulders and breast like a bib.

The expenses of the palace were cut down to {248} a minimum, and Philip

himself, the most prodigal and lavish of men in after years, went on

short commons. Amongst other efforts at economy made by him one

originated a fashion which became deeply rooted in the Spanish

character, and which the Italian minister of another Philip--the

Frenchman--a hundred years afterwards, said had a large share in making

Spaniards the leisurely and dignified people they were. The wide,

falling Walloon collar, with little or no stiffening,--as will be seen

in portraits of the time--was apt to wrinkle round the neck and very

soon became dirty; so an ingenious tailor in the Calle Mayor submitted

to the young King and his brother Carlos a new device, consisting of a

high square collar of cardboard covered with light-coloured silk inside

and with the same stuff as the doublet outside. By means of heated

rollers and shellac the cardboard was permanently moulded into a

graceful curve which bent outwards at the height of the chin.[4]

Philip was pleased with the novelty and ordered some of the new

"golillas," as they were called, for himself and his brother. The

tailor, in high glee, went to his shop to make them, but alas! heated

rollers turned with handles and smoking pots of shellac were suspicious

things in those days, and the spies of the Council promptly haled the

tailor and his uncanny instruments before the President, who sagely

decided that there was some devilish witchcraft behind it all; and if

not--well, the accursed {249} things he was making were lined with

light blue silk in violation of the pragmatic, so he must be punished

anyhow. A bonfire was made of the poor man's stock before his door and

he was put under lock and key; but when Olivares heard of it he was

furious. He and the Duke of Infantado sent for the President and rated

him soundly as a meddling old fool for burning the King's new collars.

The President declared his ignorance that they were for the King, but

pointed out how outrageous they were in shape, and how they sinned

against the pragmatic; but he was soon silenced by the Count-Duke, who

told him they were the best and most economical things ever invented,

as they did away with the need for constant washing of collars, and

would last ten years without further expense or trouble.

The golilla "caught on" with high and low. It is true that heads had

to be carried stiffly and turned slowly, but Spanish heads were

intended so to be used and no complaint was made. No more pragmatics

against ruffs, moreover, were ever needed again, and the costly,

cumbrous fashion went out for good. This was in 1623, the same year as

Charles Stuart went on his hairbrained trip to Madrid, and during his

stay all the pragmatics were suspended, in order that he might see how

splendid the Madrileños could be if left to themselves. They did their

best to sustain their reputation and the poverty-stricken country was

again plunged into the maddest vortex of prodigality that even

dissolute Madrid had ever seen, and flaunting Buckingham himself was

outshone in brilliancy and lavishness by the nobles of Philip's Court.

The strict law of Charles V. limiting the {250} wearing of jewellery

and precious stones had been re-imposed, but the list of gems

displayed, given, and received as presents during Charles' visit, and

the sumptuous dresses worn, has been left on record, down to the

smallest detail, by one of the King's attendants;[5] and shows an

inconceivable lavishness which naturally would, and did, make it

difficult to revert in Madrid to the severe orders of the pragmatics

again.

The tendency of the time, however, was against barbaric splendour, and

gradually the taste for gold and silver tissues and embroideries in

civil costume was modifying itself, but new extravagancies sprang up as

old ones languished. Philip's sister Anna had married Louis XIII. of

France in 1615 with great pomp, and all the Spanish Court had assembled

on the historic ford of the Bidasoa which marked the French frontier.

They brought back some new fashions with them, caught from the

Parisians. Since Charles V., for good reasons, was obliged to have his

curls cropped at Barcelona, Spaniards of all classes had worn the hair

short, and parted as it is in England at present. The French wore it

longer and the Spaniards now followed their lead. But not all at once.

They first adopted the mode of having two ugly locks like long, limp

Newgate-knockers, called "guedejas," hanging before the ears, the back

of the head being cropped and the top surmounted by a twist or curl

called a "copete." In the early portraits of Philip IV. this style of

headdress may be seen.

{251}

Another fashion brought from France was much more objectionable, but

took a stronger hold in Spain than elsewhere. Round hoop-skirts or

farthingales had been common in most parts of Europe for over fifty

years before, but the new refinement, called a "guarda-infante," was a

very large, farthingale flattened back and front so as to stick out

inordinately at the sides, particularly at the hips. The jaunty

Madrileñas added to it a new feature, which made it worse than ever,

namely, a metal section or facing to the bottom hoop which resounded

against a similar plate on the heels of their clogs, or clanked upon

the ground, so that a musical clickety-click accompanied them wherever

they went; even as it did that aged equestrienne of Banbury famed in

English nursery lore. As the bold wenches minced along they prided

themselves upon the eccentric or rhythmical effects they produced.

They would be neither shamed, coerced, nor persuaded to abandon the

foolish caprice until they tired of it themselves, but Don Philip did

his best by pragmatics to suppress it. In 1639 the famous fulmination

against female extravagance in dress was issued, part of which ran as

follows:

"His Majesty orders that no woman, whatever her quality, shall wear a

guarda-infante; which is a costly, superfluous, painful, ugly,

disproportionate, lascivious, indecent article of dress, giving rise to

sin on the part of the wearers and on that of men for their sakes. The

only exception to this rule shall be public prostitutes.

"No skirts shall consist of more than eight yards of silk or a

proportionate quantity of other stuff, nor shall they measure more than

four yards round; the {252} same rule shall apply to polonaises,

over-skirts, hen-coop skirts and petticoats.

"No woman wearing shoes shall have a bottom hoop, farthingale, or

anything else in the skirt for the purpose of making a noise, and

bottom hoops or farthingales shall not be worn except with pattens at

least five inches high.

"No woman shall wear low-cut bodices except women of known evil life.

Any person guilty of infraction of this pragmatic shall lose the

offending article of dress and pay a fine of 20,000 maravedis for the

first offence, and for the second double that amount, with exile from

the Court."

The unfortunate dressmakers who made the garments were to be much more

severely punished than the fair wearers, and four years' penal

servitude was their sentence for a second offence.

The offended Madrileñas did not put up tamely with such tyranny, and,

led by three frisky damsels, the daughters of a famous judge, they came

out the day after the pragmatic was proclaimed, swaggering and jingling

up and down the Prado in the widest guarda-infantes, the most

outrageous farthingales, and the noisiest of hoops; and dared the

scandalised alguaciles to touch them, since they could hardly arrest

all the rank and beauty of the Court; and the fair ones practically had

their own way, for Philip only issued a grave and sorrowful

remonstrance against the indelicacy and expense of their constantly

changing caprices, and begging them to conform to their duty. But they

pleased themselves as usual, although it is said that their three fair

ringleaders did no go quite scot-free, as their father the judge,

scandalised that his own daughters {253} should be the first to break

the law, condemned them to dress in nun's garb of the coarsest frieze.

Nothing daunted, the recalcitrant "Gilimonas,"[6] as they were called,

managed, with nods and winks and frisking skirts, to look more

deliciously provocative than ever in their penitential garb, and their

pastors and masters were glad enough to get them back again into their

clicking farthingales to avoid the scandal.

Nor were the gallants of the other sex more submissive about their

lovelocks. An order was proclaimed at the same time, saying, "His

Majesty orders that no man shall wear a topknot, or lovelock before the

ears, or any curls upon his head--and barbers who dress the hair in

this fashion shall be fined 200 maravedis and be imprisoned for 10

days." Men who wore the offending curls were to be excluded from Court

and all public offices. "Liars' Parade" was as much upset about this

as about titles, and made a desperate attempt to resist. It was in the

very heyday of poetry in Spain--Calderon, Lope de Vega, Quevedo, and a

host of others were for ever firing off poetical squibs and satires at

the foibles of the age, the "Liars' Parade" being the central exchange

for the "good things" of poets, big and little, from the monarch

downwards. A cloud of barbed poetical arrows from scores of poetical

bows were consequently shot at the royal decree against topknots and

guedejas; and ridicule and satire were poured out unsparingly upon

those who were responsible for it. But to be shut out from the

presence of king and ministers, to have the public service closed

against them, was {254} too hard to be borne by the noble swaggerers

and kept poets of the Calle Mayor, so they gave way and took to the

long, lank, straight hair all round, which Philip himself wore for the

rest of his life, though others, particularly away from the Court,

still clung to the guedejas and short backhair.

When Philip IV. had been gathered to his fathers in the jasper vault of

the Escorial, and his sickly son had married a French princess, Spain

began to conform its fashions to those which ruled in the Court of the

Roi-soleil, but somehow the three-cornered plumed hat, so general in

France and England, never became popular in Spain. The large

flap-brimmed hat with feathers still lingered when the Queen Regent

Mariana, during her rivalry with her bold step-son, Don Juan José of

Austria, raised a regiment of Swiss and German mercenaries. These

soldiers wore a very broad-brimmed hat, flat all round, and slightly

turned up at the edge, much like the wideawakes of to-day. This hat

caught the fancy of the Spaniards, who dubbed it "Chambergo," a Spanish

variant of "Schomberg," after whom the regiment was called, and this

hat has to this day never lost its hold upon the Spanish populace,

although they had to raise a revolution to keep it, as will be related

presently.

A very absurd craze at the end of the seventeenth century, which

official remonstrance was powerless to put down, was the universal

wearing of great horn-rimmed spectacles, such as may be seen in the

portrait of Quevedo, facing page 256; men and women of fashion insisted

upon wearing these ugly appendages, whether they needed them or not,

and {255} literary fashion though it was in a literary age, much sport

was given to the poetasters in attacking it.

By the time Charles the Bewitched had grown up, French fashion ruled in

Madrid, with the sole exceptions of the golilla (somewhat changed in

shape to suit the long backhair) and the round-brimmed hat, which

resisted all attempts to displace them; but the old vice of

extravagance still continued in spite of changed fashions, and in 1674

a pragmatic was issued deploring again the costly excess in dress, the

abuse of adornment of equipages, and the idle luxury of the time. The

severe decrees of Philip IV. are re-enacted, and a code of permissible

dress laid down, in which velvets, silks, satins, taffeties, of all

colours, stamped and plain, are allowed, but foreign textures are to be

equal in weight and fineness to Spanish goods.

The pragmatics now, however, had altered their tone. They were

exhortatory rather than comminatory during the last years of the House

of Austria. A change came with the advent of the first Bourbon Philip

V. The Spaniards were sensitive, and resented the inferiority implied

by the adoption by the Court and society of the French fashions, high

heels, wide-skirted coats, full-bottomed wigs, and the rest; so the

mass of the people clung to their cropped back-hair, their

broad-brimmed hats, long cloaks, and above all their stately stiffened

"golillas." Philip was too wise to run atilt against the golilla at

first, and indeed adopted it himself, as may be seen in his portrait as

a youth in the Louvre. But he wrote an anonymous pamphlet against it,

and lost no opportunity of pointing out its unfitness for working

people and soldiers. Alberoni, with his caustic {256} Italian wit, was

for ever sneering at it, so that when Philip abandoned it and took to a

collar and white lace cravat public opinion was prepared for the change

and the golilla fell, after a reign of a hundred years.

When Philip was firm upon his throne after his long struggle, he issued

a pragmatic, in 1723, once more trying to stem the tide of

extravagance, precisely as if it had never been tried and failed

before. No gold or silver either in texture or trimming was to be

worn. No gold, glass, pearl, or steel buttons were to be allowed. No

precious stones, real or false, might be used in trimming or

fastenings, there were to be no foreign ornaments, and sham gems and

jewellery were strictly prohibited. No silk might be worn but such as

was of Spanish manufacture. Servants were to be clothed in plain cloth

and woollen stockings, and no person but a grandee was allowed to keep

more than two lackeys; and no silk was to be used on harness or the

outside of coaches. No person might drive more than four horses in the

capital, and no lawyer, notary, or tradesman was permitted to keep a

coach. Doctors and priests alone might ride a pacing mule, all other

men were bidden to mount horses only. Artisans and workmen were to

dress exclusively in baize, serge, or frieze; their cuffs alone might

be of silk. The pains and penalties in this great pragmatic were many

and severe, but the decree aimed at doing too much. So many fine and

delicate doubtful points arose with regard to its provisions, that for

years after fresh proclamations were constantly being made to elucidate

this pragmatic of 1723; and through the many loopholes offenders

escaped, and the act became a dead letter.

[Illustration: FRANCISCO DE QUEVEDO VILLEGAS _from the collection of

his Grace the Duke of Wellington._]

{257}

Indeed, sumptuary laws were already growing out of date, even in Spain;

the courtiers copied the latest fashions from Paris, and the common

people, more out of patriotism and mute resentment than anything else,

made their cloaks longer and longer and their hats wider and wider.

The long ends of the cloaks had to be put out of the way somehow, so

they were thrown across the face to the opposite shoulder, and, what

with the broadbrim over the brow and the cloak over the mouth, none of

the face was seen but the eyes.

Spain during the greater part of the eighteenth century had the

ill-fortune to be governed by foreign ministers, mostly Italians, and

one after the other they tried to cut stubborn Spain to the same

pattern as the rest of the world. The more they tried the more sulky

and determined became the people, and it resolved itself into a

national article of faith to resist all change; things Spanish being

better than things elsewhere. When Philip's younger son, Charles III.,

came from Naples to rule them he brought with him his Neapolitan

ministers. Grimaldi said that the Spaniards all looked like

conspirators slinking about in the darkness with their covered faces.

An attempt was made to light the streets with oil-lamps, but the people

resented such a foolish foreign fad, and smashed the lamps as fast as

they were put up. The offenders could not be identified with their

covered faces and slouch hats, so the King was persuaded by the Marquis

of Squillaci (Esquilache, as the Spaniards called him) to issue a new

pragmatic. Its tone was more one of sorrow than of anger. The King

was shocked for foreigners to see such a boorish fashion in his {258}

capital, and had determined that in future no long cloaks or

round-brimmed hats were to be worn. Either a short cape or a skirted

coat was allowed, and men might wear either their own hair or a wig,

but they must cover it with a three-cornered hat and not a Chambergo,

and the face must not be hidden in any way.

This order was proclaimed on the 4th of March, 1766, and police were

posted in the principal places with shears to curtail cloaks and lop

hat-brims. It happened that a man pursued by alguaciles for wearing

the forbidden garments took refuge in the precincts of the church of

the Trinity, where he was followed by the officers and beaten, in

defiance of sanctuary. An infuriated crowd collected and overpowered

the authorities, who were dismayed at the feeling evinced, and withdrew

their men. For the next few days men all over Madrid ostentatiously

flaunted their cloaks and broad-brims before the barracks and police

posts, and there is no doubt that the feeling was taken advantage by

politicians for their own ends to goad the people to fury against the

Italian ministers. Matters came to a head on the 23rd of March, when a

soldier attempted to seize a man with his face covered. A crowd, ready

for mischief, collected immediately, and the authorities were

overpowered. The mob swept up the Calle de Leon across the Calle de

Alcalá to Squillaci's house (the famous "house with the seven

chimneys") which they wrecked, although the minister had fled. With

broad-brimmed hats on the top of poles they scoured the streets, making

all men they met uncock their hats. Overpowering all resistance, they

assembled {259} before the palace. The guards used force in vain, and

that night the capital was in the hands of the mob. The gaols were

opened, houses wrecked, foreigners assailed and killed, the King's

Walloon Guard especially being singled out for vengeance. Squillaci

and Grimaldi had fled, and the Spanish ministers, either out of

timidity or sympathy, practically sided with the rioters. The rising

spread rapidly to the provinces, old grievances were raked up again,

and a dangerous revolution was in progress, when the King surrendered

unconditionally. People were to wear what they pleased, food and oil

were to be reduced in price, and the Italian ministers were smuggled

away, never to return.

That practically ended the fight for sumptuary control. Finery was

triumphant in the long struggle, and the strong arm of authority was

obliged to confess itself powerless to dictate on the question of

personal adornment. Half-hearted attempts were made after this to

interfere in sumptuary matters by Spanish sovereigns, but the effects

of their decrees were hardly felt outside their own households. In

1780, for instance, a pragmatic as severe in form as ever was issued,

minutely regulating the wearing of mourning and prohibiting mourning

coaches, but little notice was taken of it after the first few weeks;

and later still a curious mild little decree was issued by Charles IV.

limiting the number of dishes which, according to custom, many

officials were entitled to receive daily from the royal kitchens. It

is a long drop from Alfonso the Wise to the silly dodderer who handed

over his kingdom to Napoleon because his son had offended him; but the

same feeling, almost the {260} same phraseology, pervades the first

pragmatic we have quoted and the last. Both deplore the lavishness and

luxury of the people, and exhort them to correct the excess and

superfluity which characterises their tables; and in both of them the

King promises that he himself will rigidly conform to his own decree

and reform the extravagance of his private repasts.

Custom, taste, and perhaps necessity, have done what five hundred years

of "pragmatics" failed to do. The Spaniards are the most sober and

frugal-feeding nation in Europe, and certainly do not exceed in the

matter of gaudy or ostentatious raiment. The only traits left to them

perhaps by the extravagant old fashions we have described, are their

consuming love for driving about the streets in a fine carriage,

however much they may stint in all else; and the grave stiff-necked

dignity which a century of the golilla left behind it.

[1] Andres Muñoz' MSS., National Library, Madrid.

[2] "L'Espagne au 16me et 17me siècles," par Morel Fatio. Paris, 1878.

[3] "Discursos y apuntamientos de Don Mateo de Lison y Biedma."

Secretly printed in 1622.

[4] As first invented, the golilla opened in front, as shown in the

portrait of Quevedo, facing page 256, but later, when the hair was worn

long, it was made square in front and was fastened behind, as shown in

the portrait of Charles the Bewitched.

[5] Manuscript of Don Diego de Soto y Aguilar in the Royal Academy of

History in Madrid, transcript in the author's possession.

[6] Their father's name was Gil Imon de la Mota.