Eighteenth-century Spain is a difficult period to treat, and this is so because it is a century "eclipsed" by those that precede and follow it. This delicate situation has made the 1700s end up in an intermediate position, especially in a country like Spain, straddling these centuries between imperial politics and the transition to a liberal state. However, it is precisely this character that gives the so-called Age of Enlightenment a very special aura, essential for understanding contemporary Spain. Some time ago, we delved specifically into the Spanish Enlightenment (Duro Garrido, 2021) to understand the cultural and philosophical bases on which the reforms discussed in this article were based. Indeed, the eighteenth century was a century of change, almost we could say one of turbulence. With the arrival of a new dynasty to the Spanish crown, the Bourbons, it wasn't just the name of the royal family that changed. The new monarchs, with Philip V at their head, embarked on an ambitious reform program. The intensity of these reforms, logically, varied depending on the king and the time. To cite some examples, the impetus of monarchs such as the aforementioned Philip V or Charles III was much greater than that of kings like Ferdinand VI or Charles IV. Regardless, it is true that the new French dynasty considered it convenient to change both central and local administration in what were now their new domains.
The New Plant Decrees
The importance of Philip V (1683-1746) in the history of the Spanish monarchy is not accidental. Not only was he the first Bourbon king in Spain, but he also became the protagonist of the first reforms after the War of Succession (1700-1715). The troops of the now new monarch had defeated those supporting his rival for the Spanish throne, Archduke Charles (1685-1740), future Emperor Charles VI. Catalonia and Valencia were among some territories that supported Philip's opponent, a fact not forgotten by the new king. The monarch did not only want to reform central administration but also unify the laws of the kingdom in order to give it greater administrative and legal uniformity, thus addressing what Pedro Voltés called "the foral problem" (Voltes Bou, 1955). The victorious Philip found then in the defeat of these territories the perfect pretext to proceed with the elimination of their charters through the New Plant Decrees, a series of legislative measures that were applied from 1707 until 1716, during and after the war, and which among other things aimed at eliminating the charters of territories such as Catalonia, Valencia, Aragon, and Majorca. Derogation of the charters of Aragon and Valencia (Novísima Recopilación, 1805).
The victory in the war, the power of arms, was thus for the king a sufficient reason to end these charters and be able to establish a new administrative project aimed at adapting all the bureaucratic reality of the kingdom to the Castilian model.
Thinning out the central administration: councils and secretariats
Along with the New Plant Decrees, the other front of the new dynasty's reforms was that of the central state administration. The Habsburgs, who had previously held the Spanish crown, relied on councils to adopt their measures. These were large institutions that helped the king make decisions on a wide range of issues. Among the councils we can find territorial ones, which aimed at advising on the governance of the domains of the Monarchy. This first group included the Council of Indies, the Council of Castile, the Council of Aragon, or the Council of Flanders, among others. Subsequently, there were councils that did not deal with territories but rather specific competencies, such as the Council of State, the Council of Finance, the Crusade Council, or the Orders Council.
Philip V himself, considering that the functioning of the councils was slow and stagnant, decided to transfer most of their powers to the secretariats of State and Cabinet. Not all councils disappeared as institutions, nor were the secretariats entirely new ones, but it is true that with the Bourbons the capacity to advise the king shifted from these councils to the mentioned secretariats. The reform was deep-seated, since our current ministries have much in common with these secretariats, and ministers with former secretaries. In the councils decisions were taken collectively. On the contrary, the structure of the secretariats favored greater agility in decision-making, but it is also true that these decisions were no longer made by large groups but rather by a certain number of people close to the monarch. Thus, one moved from a system where decisions passed through more people to another where the secretary's judgment and closeness to the king prevailed.
Fighting corruption: local administration
Once the reform of central administration had been addressed, the monarchy's eyes turned to life at the local level. The monarch most committed to this second line of reforms was the celebrated Charles III (1716-1788). One must imagine that in a Spain where communications were very poor it was not uncommon for local lords to do as they pleased, forming authentic local oligarchies. The Crown wanted at all costs to prevent this from happening, so it sought to intervene in the governance of cities and towns. To this end, the figure of the syndic personer of the common was created, a kind of "tribune of the plebs," that is, a representative of the people who could theoretically become a counterweight to oligarch influence. Additionally, the king also created the figure of the deputies of the common, whose main function was to take charge of provisioning and the administration of town hall assets, also known as proprietary goods. The point about provisioning is particularly important, for by intervening in this aspect, the deputies of the common could investigate abuses committed in this area by members of these local oligarchies (Domínguez Ortiz, 1989).
To conclude, why reform?
The spirit of change driven by Enlightenment ideas and the political initiative of new kings was motivated by various factors. First, it seems clear that the new way of understanding state administration came with the new dynasty. That is, the more centralized dynamic tending towards institutional and legal uniformity was an aspect inherited from French political culture which was sought to be imported into Spain. "One king for one kingdom, one kingdom for one king" would be the maxim that could define the Bourbon stance, in contrast to the mosaic of diverse political entities that recognized the Austrian monarch as their sovereign in previous centuries.
But reforms also had a much more practical and tangible purpose. It was about controlling, extending the reach of state power into territories where its influence did not reach or had difficult access, which was very clear with local reforms. Through the creation of positions such as those already mentioned, sovereigns sought to closely monitor powers that escaped their control, and in the best case, control them or neutralize their influence. Whether these reforms achieved their objectives is hard to say, but what seems clear is that they laid much of the groundwork for the emergence and development of state forms that emerged in the nineteenth century. Thus, a significant part of the Spanish institutional structure was changed. As Ángeles Pérez Samper (2000) stated, "there were projects and there were realizations."
Bibliography
Domínguez Ortiz, A. (1989). Carlos III y la España de la Ilustración. Alianza.
Duro Garrido, R. (December 2, 2021). What became of the Spanish Enlightenment?. ArqueoTimes. /articles/what-became-of-the-spanish-enlightenment-i/
Novísima Recopilación de las Leyes de España (1805). Madrid
Pérez Samper, M. Ángeles (2000). The Spain of the Enlightenment Age. Ariel.
Voltes Bou, P. (1955) “Felipe V y los fueros de la Corona de Aragón”, Revista de Estudios Políticos, 84, 97-120.
.jpg){kind=link}
Comments