FUNDAMENTALLY, there was no change in the classes of Spanish society in this period as regards their legal and social standing, except in the case of the rural population of Aragon. One of the characteristic notes of the era was a certain democratic sentiment of a philanthropic kind, exhibiting itself vaguely in a desire for the well-being of mankind, and practically in the social, economic, and intellectual betterment of the masses, without any attempt being made to improve their juridical position. This ideal, which was not confined to Spain, became more and more widespread with the increase in influence of the French encyclopedists, and got to be a fad of high society, being encouraged by the kings themselves. Many of its manifestations will be taken up later in dealing with economic institutions, but the sentimental discussion of the ideal may be remarked upon here; this at length went so far as to result in the formulation of political doctrines of a democratic character, but they were not yet translated into law. Such social reforms as were made came for the most part in the last three reigns of the era, especially in that of Charles III.

The description of the nobility in the period of the House of Austria might almost be repeated for this era. The nobles had long since lost their political power, but the wealth of the grandees and the privileges and the prestige of all ranks of the nobility were so great that this class was a more important factor in Spanish life than it is today. Pride of noble rank continued to be almost an obsession, despite the attempts to check it; with a view to diminishing petitions for the recognition of rights of hidalguÍa, a law was passed in 1758 calling for the payment of a large sum of money when the petitioner’s title dated back to the fourth or fifth grandfather. On the other hand, the kings were responsible for acts which tended to encourage the eagerness for noble rank. Ferdinand VI officially recognized that the people of Vizcaya were all of hidalgo rank; Charles III created the order which bears his name, and Charles IV founded that of the “noble ladies of MarÍa Luisa”; various societies of nobles for equestrian exercises, in imitation of the military orders, were formed, and they were given certain privileges in criminal jurisdiction. To be sure, the grant of these honors was a source of revenue to the state. The recognition of the privileged character of the nobles was manifest, even in the case of the more degraded members of that class; a law of 1781 provided that nobles who were arrested as vagabonds should be sent to the army with the rank of “distinguished soldiers.” The grandees and the other nobles possessed of seigniorial estates still controlled the appointment of many municipal functionaries; in 1787 there were 17 cities, 2358 villas, and 1818 aldeas and pueblos in seigniorial hands, in some of which the king shared jurisdiction with the lords. Similarly, the military orders had the right to appoint the clergymen of 3 cities, 402 villas, 119 pueblos, and 261 aldeas. Many monopolies of a medieval type still survived in favor of the lords, such as those of hunting, fishing, the baking of bread, the making of flour, and the use of streams and forests, and in some cases the lord’s vassals were subject to medieval tributes and services. It is rather by comparison with matters as they are today, however, that these incidents loom large; they were but the survivals of a system which was already dead. The worst of these seigniorial rights, the Aragonese lord’s power of life and death over his villeins, was abolished by Philip V. The kings did not dare to suppress all of the seigniorial privileges, but took steps to overcome them, as by submitting the rights of certain lords to rigorous proofs, by hindering sales of jurisdiction, by subjecting the appointments of the lords to the approval of the CÁmara, by naming special royal officials for the various seigniorial holdings, and in general by facilitating the reincorporation in the crown of such estates. By this time the lesser nobility enjoyed few exemptions of a financial character, but the great nobles still possessed such privileges. The kings employed indirect methods to cause them to submit to taxation. Thus payments were demanded in lieu of military service, and the media anata (half annates) was required for the recognition of the title of a successor to landed estates; certainly the immensely wealthy grandees were able to pay these tributes without serious economic loss to themselves. Furthermore, the great nobles continued to be a court nobility, and were jealously proud of the special privileges of an empty character which marked them off from the classes below them. For example, a grandee had the right to keep his hat on and to sit down in the presence of the king; to be called “cousin” by the king; to have a private guard; to preside over the sessions of the noble branch of the Cortes; to be visited and saluted by ayuntamientos, viceroys, and other authorities; to have a better place than others, both indoors and out; and to be free from imprisonment except by a special decree of the king.

There was no essential change in the composition and character of the middle classes in this era. The working classes of the cities attained to a little more liberty than formerly, as a result of the decline of the guilds, while those of the country, if they had improved their juridical position, continued nevertheless in a state of misery and poverty. The rural wars of past reigns were missing, however. The evil lot of the rural classes was due more to the backwardness of agriculture, the vast extent of unworked lands common, and the widespread practice of entailing estates, than to bonds of a social character. An interesting attempt, at once to raise the urban laborer, and to break down the sharp dividing line between the nobility and the plebeian classes, was a law of 1783, which declared that the trades of artisans—such as those of the carpenter, tailor, and shoemaker—were to be considered honorable, and since municipal offices were usually in the hands of the hidalgo class it was also enacted that the practice of these trades did not incapacitate a man from holding positions in the local government or even from becoming an hidalgo. This well-meant law was not able to overcome social prejudices, however, and when an endeavor was made to interpret it in the sense that it authorized the entry of artisans into the military orders, which had always been composed only of nobles, it was decreed in 1803 that it had never been intended to raise them to that degree, for the military orders were founded on the necessity of maintaining the lustre of the nobility.

A spirit of racial tolerance for the despised classes made its appearance in this era. Laws placing prohibitions on the gypsies were repeatedly enacted until the time of Charles III, but in 1783 that monarch declared that the gypsies were not to be considered a tainted race, and ordered that they be admitted to the towns and to occupations on the same basis as other Spaniards, provided they would abandon their dress, language, and special customs. Similarly, in 1782 Charles III endeavored to free the descendants of Jews from the stigma of their ancestry by enacting that they should not be obliged to live in a separate quarter or wear any device indicative of their origin. A law of 1785 permitted them to serve in the army or navy,—a right which had previously been denied them. These generous laws for the gypsies and the descendants of Jews were as little capable as those just mentioned concerning artisans of overcoming social prejudices, wherefore they failed of their objects. In matters of religion the laws affecting the despised classes were more in keeping with general sentiment. In 1712 it was ordered that Moslem slaves who had been set free must leave the country; in 1802 the prohibition against Jews returning to the peninsula was reaffirmed as absolute in the case of those who retained the Jewish faith. Slavery continued to be legal, but laws were passed that slaves escaping to Spain from other lands, except from the Spanish colonies, became ipso facto free. The treaty of 1779 with Morocco provided that prisoners of war should not henceforth be enslaved. The institution of slavery existed on a great scale in the Americas, though Charles III alleviated the rigors of the situation by his beneficent legislation.

Legislation affecting the family aimed to tighten the bonds between parents and children, which had become loosened as a result of the increasing spirit of individualism. Thus a law of 1766 ordered that the prior consent of parents should be obtained before children could marry, although a remedy was provided for an unreasonable withholding of consent; in the preamble it was stated that the law was due to the frequent occurrence of “unequal marriages.” Several later laws upheld the same principle. Legislation concerning property was characterized by the ideas of the physiocratic school of thinkers, who referred all social and economic problems to the land as the fundamental basis. Among the Spanish physiocrats (for the physiocratic ideal was widespread in western Europe) were Campomanes, Floridablanca, and Jovellanos, who were among the greatest of Spanish reformers in the reign of Charles III and the early years of Charles IV. In keeping with physiocratic views the laws tended to the release of realty from incumbrances and to the distribution of lands among many persons. The practice of entailing estates in primogeniture was one of the institutions attacked by the physiocrats. It was admitted that it was necessary in the case of the great nobles, in order to maintain the prestige of the family name, but it was held to be desirable to check the extension of the institution in other cases and to facilitate the extinction of entails. Thus a law of 1749 permitted of the sale of entailed estates for an annuity in the case of financially ruined houses; a law of 1789 prohibited the founding of new entails, and facilitated the sale of realty already so held; a law of 1795 imposed heavy taxes on existing entails; and a law of 1798 authorized the sale of entailed estates, provided the funds should be invested in a certain loan announced at that time. Still other laws were passed in this period, with the result that many entails disappeared and others were diminished in size. The nobles resisted the change, and the greater number of the entails remained in existence, although reduced in income. In the same way municipal and ecclesiastical holdings were attacked. In the case of the former (propios), laws were passed repeatedly—for example in 1761, 1766, 1767, 1768, and especially in 1770—for the partition of the cultivable and pastoral lands and for their assignment to a number of individuals. Nevertheless, the majority of this type of municipal lands continued in the possession of the towns, for the laws were not fully executed. As concerns lands utilized for the promotion of religious objects, pious foundations were attacked, and either compelled or else permitted to sell their real property, but there was considerable hesitancy about applying the same practice to lands held in mortmain by the regular and secular clergy, although the prevailing opinion of jurisconsults was opposed to these holdings. Some steps were taken, however, to free these lands, as well as other measures to hinder the giving of realty in mortmain. In the various colonization schemes of the century it was customary to forbid the transfer of lands to ecclesiastical institutions. A law of 1763 prohibited further conveyances to the church, and a law of 1798 called for the alienation of lands owned by charitable institutions, even though they might belong to the church, and some estates accordingly were sold. The resistance of the clergy, together with a certain repugnance to laying hands on the property of the church except in case of extreme necessity, operated to prevent these laws from having their full effect. It will be noticed that all of these measures were markedly individualistic, in accord with Roman principles as opposed to those of medieval society, and favorable to the change in ownership of landed estates and to their division into small holdings. This spirit was manifested even more insistently in attacking titles of a medieval character. Thus the right of farmers to fence lands for their own use was sustained, serving as a check upon the abuses of the Mesta, and the various methods of tribute from vassals to a lord (censos, foros, etc.) were the subject of legislation tending to relieve the former from their burdens. To this epoch, also, belong laws requiring the registry of titles to land. Nevertheless, the spirit of collectivism was still alive, as expressed in doctrines favoring the condemnation of individual property and the establishment of communal inclosures with the drawing of lots for land, but the followers of Roman principles were victorious in the controversy.

The spirit of individualism appeared, also, to give a deathblow to the guilds, even though they actually increased in number; there were ninety guilds in Barcelona at the close of the eighteenth century. Among the factors contributing to the decline were the following: the continuance of the exclusive spirit of the past, making entry into the guild a difficult matter; the accentuation of social differences within the guilds, such that certain elements had special privileges based on rank in the guild,—for example, a right that their sons might enter the institution without serving as apprentices; the failure of the guilds to observe their own ordinances; the frequency of lawsuits between guilds, or even between a guild and its own members; and especially the continued intervention of the state, taking over the former municipal control of the guilds and unifying the ordinances of each trade throughout the country. The relation of the state to the guilds facilitated the application of the new economic ideas which were favorable to the freedom of labor and hostile to the guilds. Thus in 1772 foreign artisans were permitted to establish themselves, without paying a special tax and without having to undergo examinations; in 1782 a general law introduced reforms facilitating apprenticeship, freeing applicants for entry into a guild from the necessity of proving the Christian faith of their ancestry (limpieza de sangre), permitting of the sale of masterships, and abolishing the distinction between the sons of masters and those of the other members; in another law of the same year painters, sculptors, and architects were authorized to work independently of guilds; in 1783 the cofradÍas attached to the guilds were suppressed, and their place was taken by benefit societies (montepÍos); in 1784 women were given a general permission to engage in any trade they wished; in 1790 it was enacted that any artisan of recognized ability could work at his trade without the need of an examination; and in 1793 a law dissolving the guilds of the silk manufacturers announced that it was neither necessary nor fitting that persons should be grouped together in guilds for carrying on such an industry. From this point it was only a step to the death of the institution. The great name in the legislation against the guilds was that of Campomanes.

If the social customs of the two preceding eras may be said to have represented the virile youth of the Spanish peoples, followed by a seemingly mortal sickness resulting from a too great indulgence in “wild oats,” this period stands for the recovery of the race (just as occurred in other aspects of peninsula life) in a conventional, outwardly respectable, and on the whole fairly wholesome, if also somewhat monotonous, middle age. Simplicity, regularity, and subordination to principles of authority (as represented by king, church, and parents, checking initiative and making long-established custom the guiding rule in daily life) were the dominating social characteristics. Both in the city and in the country, people arose early; the Consejo de Castilla met at seven in the morning from April to September, and at eight from October to March. It was the custom also to go to bed early, to perform one’s daily tasks in precisely the same way each day, to hear mass daily, to have family prayers each day, to salute one’s parents respectfully on the same daily recurring occasions, and to display a like respect in the presence of official personages or of clergymen. If people now and then indulged in gossip about their neighbors, they gave little thought to persons or events beyond their immediate circle; they were in no hurry to learn the news of the world, waiting tranquilly for the arrival of the mails, which were usually infrequent and meagre.

The kings themselves helped to make this monotonous type of life fashionable. Philip V was domestically inclined, retiring, and melancholy, and from the time of his marriage with Isabel Farnesio was nearly always at the side of his wife, who even accompanied him when he received his ministers before he had arisen from bed. His daily life was passed in pious exercises and in hunting, with music to vary the monotony. Ferdinand VI, also domestic, retiring, and God-fearing, was very fond of music, with the result that the court was brightened by frequent concerts, operas, and theatrical representations, on which vast sums of money were expended. Charles III was a man of very simple tastes, an enemy of the theatre and of music, but passionately devoted to hunting. He was so methodical that every moment of the day within the palace was regulated by royal ordinances, and the annual journeys and changes of residence of the royal family took place each year on the same day. In monotonous regularity of life Charles IV resembled his illustrious predecessor, but passion for hunting amounted in his case almost to a disease; after having breakfast and hearing mass he would hunt until one o’clock, and would return to that sport after having partaken of dinner. The sameness of court life in this period was broken by various receptions and royal feast days, but even these were cold and formal, following prescribed courses, although celebrated with great pomp. In 1804 there were eight greater gala days and seventeen lesser ones, besides those arising from unforeseen events, such as the reception of a foreign ambassador. Furthermore, royal journeys necessarily involved festivities and heavy expense. Balls, banquets, and other diversions found no place at court, and the accession of Charles III put an end to concerts and plays. The ordinary life of the nobles followed that of the kings. Comparing it with that of France, a French duke who came to Spain in the reign of Philip V said that it was tiresome, almost unsociable, and lacking in comforts, despite the fact that great sums of money were often spent for entertainments of a formal nature. Toward the close of the century the more genial practices of other European countries began to percolate into Spain. Godoy was one who took pleasure in giving balls. Others followed his example, and the austere simplicity of Spanish life began to yield to comforts, diversions, and dissipation. Nevertheless, the old conventions still ruled, especially in the country districts, where the poorer nobility resided, occupying themselves in hunting and in local politics and intrigues. The penurious nobles of the hidalgo class continued to be found at the capital in the train of the greater representatives of the titled element.

Some clue to the modesty of life in general may be obtained from the cheapness of rents and the scantiness of furniture in the houses of the capital. The average annual rental was 1504 reales ($94), and there were many houses of an inferior type to be had for 45 reales ($2.81) a month, although, of course, money values were much greater then than now. House decorations and furniture were poor to the point of shabbiness. Walls did not begin to be papered until the close of the eighteenth century. Usually they were white-washed and hung with a few pictures of a religious character or with brass candlesticks. The floor was of unpolished wood, covered over in winter with mats, and there was a like simplicity in chairs. Writing-desks were often present, but were opened only when visitors were being received. Candles were employed for lighting, and the odorous, scantly warming brazier was the principal resource against cold. The same sobriety manifested itself as regards the table. The puchero, or cocido, made up primarily of chickpeas (garbanzos), was the basis of the meal, and usually was the only element. Inns were equally uninviting, and it was not until the close of the era that the example of foreign countries prevailed upon the Spaniards to introduce somewhat more comfortable hostelries.[61]

The simplicity and severity of Spanish customs were not maintained in matters of dress. There was a century-long conflict between the French and the native styles, the former represented by the military cut of clothing more in keeping with that of the present day, and the latter by the slouched hat and long cape, as symbolic of the indigenous modes. On grounds of morality and public safety the government opposed the native type, which lent itself too easily to the facilitation of disguise, and the methodical Charles III even considered the imposition of a national dress which should omit the traditional features. A law of 1766 ordered their abandonment and the adoption of a short cape or riding coat and the three-cornered cocked hat. The decree was the occasion of riots throughout Spain, and had to be recalled, while Squillace, the minister who had proposed it, lost his post. Aranda, his successor, achieved the desired end by indirect methods. He caused the slouched hat to be made the official head-piece of the hangman, wherefore it began to lose prestige, and the French styles were soon decisively victorious. It is to be noted, however, that the three-cornered cocked hat and other French styles of the Bourbon era were retained in Spain after they were no longer in fashion in republican and imperial France. Women’s dress was also reformed in a similar direction. Three outstanding features characterized the well-dressed woman: the skirt of silk or velvet; the mantilla, or veil, worn over the head instead of a hat; and the fan. Fans of a most luxurious type were used, with ribs of shell, mother-of-pearl, or ivory, and with ornaments of gold, while the principal part was hand-painted, often by artists of note, to represent scenes of a mythological, pastoral, or historical character. Even among the common people, especially among the so-called majos, or low-class dandies (both male and female) of Madrid, there were special types of elegant dress. Ladies’ dress-combs of unusual size, not infrequently half a foot or more in height above the hair, may be mentioned as one phase of the majo styles, which stood for a reaction against French modes, though with scant knowledge or regard for ancient Spanish customs. Majismo, both in dress and in customs, invaded the aristocracy, and has been immortalized in some of the paintings of Goya. The common people of the country were much more conservative in maintaining the earlier styles of dress, which have survived to the present day, although the uniformity of modern life has tended to make them peculiarities, rather than the prevailing modes of the different regions in which they are found.

The monotony of Spanish life did not prevent Spaniards from being fond of diversions. On the contrary they seemed to welcome a chance to escape from the narrow course of their humdrum existence. Public feast-days were numerous and very popular; events in Christian history were the occasion of most of them. People generally, unlike the monarchs, the nobles, and their imitators among the wealthy bourgeoisie, were very fond of dancing, the theatre, and bull-fighting. Dances to the accompaniment of the guitar were held on every possible occasion; on Sundays they took place in the public square of the city. The days of the waltz, onestep, and other dances now in vogue in many lands (though not in Spain) had not yet come; rather, the dances were very largely national or regional, such as the seguidillas or boleros, the fandango, guaracha, zorongo, arlequÍn, chacona, zarabanda, the Aragonese jota, the Valencian dansetes, and the Catalonian sardana, all of which gave great play to the individual and represented harmonious action of the entire body. Many of these dances, or their derivatives, survive in Spain today. Professional dancing girls were popular favorites—and not infrequently the mistresses of the great gentlemen of the court. Charles III detested dancing, but neither he nor his successor could check it, though they did regulate it to some extent. In like manner the theatre continued to be a national passion, despite the disapproval of certain great churchmen as well as of Charles III. Three great theatres were built in Madrid in the reign of Philip V. Governmental regulations were as unavailing in this as in the case of dancing. The popularity of bull-fighting got to be greater than ever, though Philip V and Charles III disliked the sport. Ferdinand VI was a devotee, and Charles IV was not unfriendly. The repugnance felt by Philip V had the effect of causing the withdrawal of the nobles from taking part in the contests, with the result that a professional class of bull-fighters developed. Charles III went so far as to prohibit the sport in 1785, but Charles IV, in 1789, consented to its return. Godoy, however, was opposed to bull-fighting, and procured its abolition in 1805. The period from 1789 to 1805 is a famous one in the history of this game. Just as happens today, so then, the names of the favorite bull-fighters were on everybody’s lips. This was a period when many of the feats of the bull-fighters which still form a part of the contest were invented. Possibly the most widely known name was that of Pepe Illo, or Hillo (great bull-fighter and writer of a treatise on the so-called art of bull-fighting), who was killed in the bull-ring at Madrid in 1801, an event which Goya reduced to canvas in one of his most famous paintings. Madrid, Aranjuez, Granada, and Seville were the only cities which had bull-rings (plazas de toros), but fights were held in all parts of Spain by utilizing the principal square of the city. Certain athletic exercises were very popular, among which the Basque game of ball, still played in Spain, is especially worthy of mention.[62] Performances of professional acrobats, jugglers, and magicians were frequent, as well as the playing of pantomimes.

The policing of cities for the first time became worthy of commendation. At the opening of the eighteenth century Madrid was ugly, extremely dirty, without architectural monuments, driveways, or promenades, and lacked a good water system. The great reforms of Aranda under Charles III and of Godoy in the next reign transformed the city, resulting in the opening of new streets, the organization of an efficient street-cleaning system (despite opposition on the ancient ground that the filthiness of the streets was a preventive of epidemics), the completion of the work of paving begun in the previous era, the development of a good water supply, the inauguration of a lighting system, the building of noteworthy edifices, the bettering of old promenades (paseos) and the opening of new ones, and the issue of numerous ordinances intended to preserve the good order and public health of the city. It was at this time, too, that the institution of the sereno (night-watchman in Spanish streets) was introduced from abroad; contrary to the usual opinion the sereno is not Spanish in origin, but of foreign importation. The walk, or drive, along the great paseos, just at evening before nightfall, became more popular among all classes than ever, and has remained a Spanish custom to the present day. Barcelona, Seville, and CÁdiz were also much improved.

But the dances, masked balls, the theatre, evening parties, and promenades furnished occasion for vicious practices. Immorality was not so brazen and unashamed as formerly, but was very nearly as prevalent. In vain were laws passed with a view to checking the evil. The lax practices continued, and received a kind of sanction during the reign of Charles IV from the example set by the queen, of which everybody except the king seemed well aware. Gambling was also the subject of restrictive legislation which failed of its design. In this respect the state was morally estopped from making complaint, because it was in this period that the national government lottery was founded. This institution, which still exists, was established, strange to say, by Charles III, in 1763, following the example of the court of Rome. Gambling, and especially the lottery, soon became the passion it has ever since remained. Smoking had long before gotten to be general among the lower classes, particularly among the already mentioned majo element; but the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie had been little inclined to the habit. They were soon to surrender to the influence of majismo, however, with the result that Spaniards and their Hispanic kinsfolk have come to be enumerated among the most inveterate smokers in the world, so far as the men are concerned. Drunkenness was not a very prevalent vice, any more than it is today, although the same could not be said with respect to the Spanish colonies.

It only remains to add that these social practices were to be found in much the same form in the Americas. Fondness for showy feast-days was even greater there, and it is also to be noted that the improvements in Spanish cities had their counterpart in the embellishment of several of those overseas.