Pedro de Tapia

On the 18th March 1582, in the village of Las Villorias, in the region of Salamanca, the Licentiate Diego Altanero and his wife doña Isabel de Tapia, took their recently born son, Pedro, to be baptized. The location of the village of Las Villorias in the region of Salamanca was the aspect of friar Pedro’s parentage most favourable to the future fortunes of so gifted a son. This accident meant that friar Pedro went to study in the Dominican friary of San Esteban in Salamanca.

It was at San Esteban in 1602, at the age of 19, that friar Pedro took his vows to become a member of the Order of Preachers - the Dominicans. He was noted for his studiousness, and in 1617, he became the Lector de Artes at San Esteban. This was his first teaching position, and involved him in the instruction of novices. His teaching career was to occupy him for the next twenty-three years. In 1618 he was made Lector de Teología in Plasencia, and in 1620 in Segovia. In 1622, at the age of 40, he moved to the friary of San Pedro Martyr in Toledo, to take up the position of Lector de Artes y Teología. It was in Toledo that he became a calificador for the Inquisition of Toledo.

In early 1623 his teaching commitments took him out of the realm of monastic teaching, to teaching in a mainstream university. He was elected to the Vespers Chair at the University of Alcalá de Henares. The next seven years at Alcalá saw friar Pedro rewarded by his Order with the title of Presentado in 1626 and he was promoted to Prime Chair in 1630. During this period at Alcalá he made the acquaintance of both friar Juan de Santo Tomás, who taught philosophy and theology at the college of Saint Thomas in Alcalá, and friar Juan Martínez who was Prior of the college. All three lived in this college while at Alcalá. These were connections which were to prove of utmost importance in friar Pedro´s later career.

Friar Pedro occupied the Prime Chair at Alcalá for ten years. In 1640, despite his protests of unfitness for the post1, he was elected to the episcopal see of Segovia. Richard Kagan estimates that the Prime Chair attracted a salary of 100,000 maravedís a year. 2 The income from the bishopric of Segovia was 20,000 ducados (7,500,000 maravedís) a year.3 The promotion of a lecturer of theology to a bishopric was not unusual. In fact, bishops were elected from three sources - the higher nobility, universities or Colegios Mayores.4 For someone of friar Pedro’s obscure social origin, a position at a university was a pre-requisite for the job. Friar Pedro’s protests that the position involved too much responsibility were overcome by a letter from friar Antonio de Sotomayor, the Confessor Royal, and by his friend friar Juan de Santo Tomás. The latter reassured him that he could continue to live in the style of a mendicant friar, even though he was a bishop.5

This election to Segovia brought friar Pedro his first personal contact with the King.6 He created a good impression. This, together with his reputation for holiness and sound doctrine, brought him the King’s favour. Due to the absence of an Archbishop of Toledo, and the proximity of Segovia to Madrid, friar Pedro played an active part in the funeral rites for the Queen, Isabel de Borbón, in 1644.7 Lorea speculates that friar Pedro’s translation to Sigüenza was due to the King’s wish to have him near Saragossa. It was also due to the influence of friar Pedro’s friend, the Duke of Medinaceli, whose lands are located in the diocese of Sigüenza. The bishopric of Sigüenza had an income of 34,166 ducados in 16488 placing it behind only Toledo, Seville, Santiago, Córdoba and Cuenca, as one of the richest sees in the Catholic Monarchy. Friar Pedro was elected to the see of Sigüenza in May 1643, but the bulls were not applied for until September 1644, and he did not enter into the bishopric until 1645.

In 1646 friar Pedro met the King and Prince in Atienza, near Sigüenza, on their way to Saragossa. In October of the same year, the King called him to Saragossa to help with the negotiations for a subsidy from the Cortes of Aragon. Friar Pedro arrived in the city on the second day of the illness of Prince Baltasar9 and was present at his death some three days later. In 1648 the King offered friar Pedro the archbishopric of Valencia10, which he refused, according to Lorea, due to the supplications of his flock. Although an archbishopric, Valencia enjoyed an income some 15,000 ducados a year less than Sigüenza.11 As it was also situated a long way from Madrid, it was not as strategically placed with regard to the Court.

Later in 1648 friar Pedro accepted the post of Bishop of Córdoba. Toribio Minguella y Armedo says that he accepted this position due to the challenge that it offered.12 Since poor harvests in 1646, and the arrival of plague, Andalusia, as a region, had been in revolt. Lack of food and disease produced the inevitable riots, which, in 1652, friar Pedro played a large part in calming.13

In 1651, his fellow Dominican, Domingo Pimentel, renounced the archbishopric of Seville in order to go to Rome as ambassador. Friar Pedro was elected to the position and the papal bulls were received on 23.9.1652. Shortly after this he made his entrance into Seville. He remained as Archbishop of Seville until his death on 5 August 1657, at the age of 76. It was during this period as Archbishop of Seville that friar Pedro published his only theological works. Doctrina christiana, which was written in Castilian, and two volumes entitled Catenae moralis doctrinae - Doctrinas de cadena moral - which were written in Latin.

Touron suggests that the Count-Duke of Olivares opposed friar Pedro’s appointment as Confessor Royal because of his rigidly orthodox views. 14 It is more probable that Olivares opposed him because of his political connections with Medinaceli and Quevedo. It is certainly true, however, that friar Pedro was a deeply religious and orthodox man. He was also exceptionally intelligent and possessed considerable political acumen. His character was one of extremes, not of compromise. He practised severe physical penances, not unusual in the epoch, lived in a bare cell, ate sparingly, and only during the last years of his life used a carriage instead of going everywhere on foot. In the last year of his life he wrote to his fellow Dominican, friar Juan Martínez, the Confessor Royal: me veo tan en los fines de esta larga navegación ... Que como es negocio tan grave, y que no se sentencia más de una vez, no es fácil moderar el temor ... que en causa propria me ayuda muy poco el aver tenido Cátedra, y en todas deseo ser enseñado, y muy en especial de V. Reverendísima a quien siempre e tenido muy particular respeto, estimación y amistad. 15

Apparently, the preaching of the art of buen morir did not help friar Pedro to overcome the natural human fear of death.

Don Francisco de Oviedo

Francisco de Oviedo was an obscure secretary to the King whose existence is only known because of his correspondence with Quevedo and friar Pedro. Don Francisco was born in the town of Casarrubios del Monte in the Tierra de Segovia. His parents, Luis de Oviedo and Beatriz de Espinosa, were also from Casarrubios. He married his cousin Ana María de Oviedo, the daughter of Antonio de Oviedo - brother of Luis - and Inés Suárez. The three families of Espinosa, Suárez and Oviedo must have formed a dynasty in Casarrubios, as they were all intermarried. Don Francisco’s cousin, Bernardo de Oviedo - son of Gonzalo de Oviedo - was, from 1612, also a secretary to the King 16 and lived with don Francisco in Madrid.

Don Francisco had an elder brother, Luis, who was granted a canonry in the Cathedral of Toledo. For reasons connected to his limpieza the Dean and Chapter of Toledo refused to allow Luis to take up this post. Luis protested against the “injustice” of this decision to the Pope. His case was upheld, so that on 5.5.1610 the Dean and Chapter were ordered to accept him, guard “perpetuo silencio”17 and pay the costs of the case. They, in their turn, protested. On 25.6.1612 “se presentó una comisión contra el dicho Luis de Oviedo”. 18 In 1625 Luis died with the affair still unsettled, so his mother Beatriz, as inheritor of his estate, along with his brother Francisco, took up the case. On 9.5.1629 the papal court “pronunciaron su sentencia difinitiva a favor de los dichos Francisco y Beatriz.”19 The case, although favourable in its outcome, left a stigma on the limpieza of Francisco and his children. In 1647, when don Francisco applied for a habit of Santiago for his son, Luis González de Oviedo, he produced a summary of the case, along with lists of all his relatives, who had served as familiars of the Inquisition and Canons of the Church. Don Francisco and Ana María had three children - Luis, as already mentioned, Bernarda and Francisco.20

Don Francisco regularly corresponded with friar Pedro, the Duke of Medinaceli, and Francisco de Quevedo. Along with Medinaceli he was named as an executor of Quevedo’s will. He was also a friend of don Pedro de Pacheco Girón - Councillor of Castile and Inquisition, later President of Crusade - who was a patron of Quevedo.21 Through Medinaceli and Quevedo, don Francisco also knew the Duke of Infantado, to whom he passed messages from Quevedo, friar Pedro and Medinaceli.

Quevedo described don Francisco as having “la astucia de zorro viejo”. 22 He was considered by all to be a thoroughly competent and trustworthy man. From his letters he can also be seen to be well informed and intelligent, religiously orthodox, hardworking and moderate in his tastes. He always acted with meticulousness and thoroughness, rumours were reported as rumours, impressions as impressions and facts as facts. He provided an invaluable service for all his correspondents. He died shortly before 1663.

The Duke of Medinaceli

The seventh Duke of Medinaceli was also referred to as the Duke of Medina or the Duke of Medina y Alcalá.23 It is by this first title that he is referred to by friar Pedro and don Francisco throughout their correspondence. Don Antonio Juan Luis de la Cerda was the only son of Juan Luis de la Cerda, sixth Duke of Medinaceli, and his second wife doña Antonia Dávila y Toledo, daughter of the second Marquis of Velada. The marriage took place in late 1606, shortly after the death of Juan Luis’ first wife, Ana de la Cueva, the daughter of his step-mother and the Duke of Alburquerque. This marriage had left an only daughter - Juana de la Cerda - who married her cousin, the fifth Duke of Montalto. Their son, the sixth Duke, was married to the fourth Duchess of Alcalá de los Gazules y Bibona, Princess of Paterno, doña María Enríquez de Ribera. Antonio Juan Luis was born on 25.10.1607 and his father died a month later on 24.11.1607. In 1623 Antonio Juan Luis contracted matrimony with doña Ana María Luisa Enríquez de Ribera Portocarrero y Cárdenas, who was heiress to her cousin the fourth Duchess of Alcalá de los Gazules.

In 1641 Medinaceli was made Viceroy of Valencia. Before he left Cogolludo - a Marquisate of his near Medinaceli - he and his wife signed a contract of matrimony for their eldest daughter Antonia, with the Duke and Duchess of Infantado. Antonia was then five years old. The marriage was not to be as Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar de la Vega y Luna de Mendoza y Sandoval24 , Count of Saldaña, and heir to Infantado, died in 1646, at the age of ten. In 1643 Medinaceli was made Captain of the Atlantic and Coast of Andalusia, and moved to Puerto de Santa María to take up the position. This was a post traditionally held by the Dukes of Medina Sidonia, but denied to the ninth Duke following his attempt at treason.25 It was in Andalusia, two years later, that the Duchess of Medinaceli and Alcalá died. From this period the eldest son - Juan Francisco - became known as the sixth Duke of Alcalá.

The marriage had produced four children: Antonia María de la Cerda (1634) who married Gaspar de Haro, Marquis of Liche, Juan Francisco de la Cerda (1637), Tomás Manuel de la Cerda (1639) and Ana Catalina de la Cerda (1641). The Dukes had entered into an agreement to marry their two sons to the two elder daughters of the Duke of Segorbe y Cardona and the Duchess of Lerma - a cousin of Medinaceli’s. Only the first of these two matrimonies took place, with Juan Francisco marrying doña Catalina de Aragón y Sandoval - cousin to Gaspar de Haro - in 1652. Tomás Manuel married the eleventh Countess of Paredes, María de Manrrique y Gonzaga. Ana Catalina married the son of the Admiral of Castile, Juan Tomás Enríquez de Cabrera. She died without issue. Thus through marriage the Medinaceli connection was linked with the highest aristocracy of the Crowns of Castile and Aragon.

Medinaceli maintained his position in Andalusia throughout the 1650s. He enjoyed considerable influence at Court and was a leading figure behind the Haro faction, having been made a Councillor of State in 1656. In 1665 he was made one of the executors to the King. Elliott describes Medinaceli as “a cultivated noble with a knowledge of Greek, Latin and Hebrew,”26 who was fundamentally opposed to validos. He died on 7.3.1671 and was succeeded by his son, Juan Francisco Tomás Lorenzo, famous valido of Charles II.

The Duke of Infantado

The fifth Duke of Infantado - don Iñigo de Mendoza - died without male heirs, his marriage having produced four daughters. The title thus passed to his eldest daughter, doña Ana de Mendoza de la Vega y Luna, who became the sixth Duchess. In an attempt to maintain the Mendoza lineage Ana first married her uncle Rodrigo de Mendoza, from which union was born a son, who died in infancy, and a daughter, doña Luisa de Mendoza de la Vega y Luna, Countess of Saldaña. On the death of Rodrigo, Ana was induced to remarry, this time to her cousin, the son of the Marquis of Mondéjar, don Juan Hurtado de Mendoza, who is often referred to as the sixth Duke of Infantado.27 Luisa de Mendoza married don Diego Gómez de Sandoval, the second son of the first Duke of Lerma and doña Catalina de la Cerda, great-aunt to Medinaceli. This marriage was an attempt by the Duchess of Infantado to gain the favour of the powerful Sandoval faction and thus recoup the fortunes of the House of Mendoza. The marriage produced two children who survived their teens - don Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar de Mendoza y Sandoval and doña Catalina de Mendoza y Sandoval. Luisa de Mendoza died in 1627, and on 11.8.1633, on the death of his grand-mother, Ana, Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar de Mendoza y Sandoval, at the age of 19, became seventh Duke of Infantado, and leader of the enormously influential Mendoza clan. Rodrigo and his sister Catalina were married on 10.2.1630 to the children of the Dukes of Pastrana, María de Silva and Rodrigo de Silva respectively, in another obvious attempt to maintian the Mendoza lineage of the Infantados. The Dukes of Pastrana were descendents of Ana de Mendoza, Princess of Eboli. The marriage between Rodrigo and María was emotionally, if not dynastically, successful - after producing two sons María was unable to have more children.28

The seventh Duke was hot-headed and eager to serve his country, an ambition not furthered by Olivares. In 1641 he became General of the Cavalry, a position much to his taste, and which he still held in 1646. 29 While very young he, along with the Duke of Pastrana, appear to have committed a number of fairly stupid youthful indiscretions.30 In 1649 Infantado became the King’s ambassador to Rome, neatly he was removed from Court and prevented from being a nuisance.31 In 1651 he was transferred from Rome to Sicily as Viceroy. Infantado returned to Spain in 1656, with his wife María de Silva, suffering from an illness such that “no hay quien les conozca.”32 In January 1657 he was described as being “lleno de bubas”,33 symptoms similar to those of bubonic plague. He died four days later, to the great delight of his brother-in-law, the Duke of Pastrana, who entered immediately in his house to draw up an inventory of his papers. María was left to sue her brother for payment of her dowry, in order to have sufficient money to maintain herself.34

The duke of Infantado was a dynastic rather than a financial catch. The duchy had an income of some 120,000 ducados per year35, but also debts of 800,000 ducados in censos in 1628. 36 In 1644 the Duke complained of “the inadequacy of all his rents to cover the interest on his debts.”37 This financial position led, in a large degree, to Infantado’s desire for a governmental post, consistently impeded by Olivares, which helps to explain his desire to overthrow the famous valido. For his contribution to the war in 1646 Infantado received “doze mill d[ucado]s y otros quatro q[ue] le avían de añadir de una encomienda y seis mill de aiuda de costa.”38 After the war finished that year he was also given the “llave de la cámara con exercicio.”39 Infantado left debts of 200,000 ducados which Cristina de Arteaga ascribes to his “mala administración”. 40 Considering that he inherited debts of 800,000 ducados this assessment begs many questions.

Juan de Santo Tomás

Juan de Santo Tomás was born on 6.7.1589 in Lisbon to the Austrian, Pedro Poinset and his Portuguese wife, María Garcés. He had a younger brother named Luis. Both brothers studied at the University of Coimbra where they received the Bachellor of Arts in 1605. In October of that year Luis Poinset Garcés stayed on at Coimbra to study law, while Juan went to the University of Louvain in Flanders to study theology. He graduated in 1608 as Bachellor of Biblical Studies. As a result of the influence of his master friar Tomás Torres, OP, at Louvain, Juan decided to become a friar and took the Dominican habit at Our Lady of Atocha in Madrid in 1609.

He took his vows on 18.7.1610, and “abandonó la nobleza de sus apellidos”41 to become friar Juan de Santo Tomás, a true and humble disciple of St. Thomas of Aquinas: Deux conditions sont requises, dit-il, pour etre un vrai disciple de Saint Thomas; la première, c’est de suivre sa doctrine comme vraie et catholique, la seconde, c’est de la développer de toutes ses forces.42

Between 1613 and 1630 friar Juan taught theology and philosophy at the college of St. Thomas in Alcalá. It was here that he made the all important acquaintance of friar Pedro and friar Juan Martínez.

In 1630 friar Juan won the Vespers Chair at Alcalá, and in 1641, following friar Pedro’s appointment to the bishopric of Segovia, the Prime Chair. He held this position until 1643 when he was appointed Confessor Royal. As a condition of becoming Confessor Royal, friar Juan requested the King to be allowed to give his salary to the poor, and retain for himself and his companion, only the necessary to maintain themselves. Another condition of the appointment was that Philip IV should be sincere in wishing to live as a good Catholic. Friar Juan, from this position, attempted to reform the morality of the Catholic Monarchy. Olivares did not trust friar Juan, “whom he suspected of being the author of his misfortunes.”43 Friar Juan was opposed to validos, an opinion shared with Medinaceli, friar Pedro and sor María de Ágreda, with whom he advised the King to correspond. During this period as Confessor Royal he worked on a new Index of prohibited books for the Inquisition. He died in 1644 in Fraga, allegedly of typhoid fever.

Friar Juan was recognized throughout the Monarchy as an extremely erudite Catholic thinker and holy man. He wrote an enormous number of books for one who died at the age of 56. His work contains eight volumes of commentary and explanation of Aquinas’ Summa theologiae. The first three volumes were edited by him, the next four by his companion, Diego Ramírez, and the eighth by Cambetis and Quetif. 44 He also wrote philosophical companions to Aristotle and Aquinas’ commentaries on Aristotle. These can be divided into two groups: the Ars Logica and Naturalis Philosophia. He wrote three works in Spanish: Explicación de la doctrina cristiana, Ayudar a bien morir and a guide to confessors, commissioned by the King in 1643. Acccording to Frances C. Wade “His detailed analysis of logical problems represents the top scholastic develop-ment of Aristotelian logic.” 45 It is his philosophy and theology that the Medinaceli group followed. Crespí de Borja described friar Juan as a “varón del espíritu y doctrina que todos saben.”46 There can be no doubt that he was an exceptional man.

Friar Juan Martínez

Juan Martínez occupied the position of Confessor Royal for over twenty years - one of the most lengthy occupations of the post - and yet he is almost absent from the history books. The dearth of information about him would lead one to assume that he was a somewhat mysterious and shady figure, but the lack has more to do with the ravages of time than the secretive nature of his character.

Juan Martínez - not to be confused with fellow Dominican Juan Martínez de Prado - was born in the Castilian town of El Corral de Almaguer in 1590. He took his vows, at the age of 16, in the Dominican convent of Santa Cruz el Real in Segovia, where he studied philosophy and theology. After teaching in San Esteban Salamanca and St. Thomas in Alcalá, he taught theology in Plasencia from where he was made Prior in Pamplona. He then taught theology in Ávila from where he was elected Rector of St. Thomas in Alcalá, where he met friar Pedro and friar Juan.47 He subsequently served as Prior in El Rosario in Madrid, St. Peter in Toldeo and St. Thomas in Madrid. In November 1643 he became a calificador for the Council of the Inquisition, and at this time he also became confessor to the Prince, Baltasar Carlos, and the Queen, Isabel de Borbón. From this time until his death in 1675 he was resident at Court, where he enjoyed enormous influence.

In 1656 Barrionuevo commented the following of him: todos acuden a él, y con sola una pluma que cada uno le deje, vendrá esta corneja a ser el ave más hermosa de todos y de más pluma.48

This is an obvious reference to Juan Martínez’s famed venality. He was an astute politician and from 1646 onwards he enjoyed considerable influence over the Council of Orders, and was in a position to influence Court patronage.

His post enabled him to gain a considerable personal income - both from official and unofficial sources. He used some of this income to found a mayorazgo in his home town, and build a house there for his nephew. He also gave 1,000 ducados a year of his salary to a foundation for studying Scripture at Santa Cruz el Real.49 He also gave a censo of 3,020 ducados of income to this foundation. The foundation of this chair gives some idea of Juan Martínez’s views of the Dominicans. The Dominicans were above all an Order of Preachers. They were meant to preach. However, most gifted entrants into the Order read scholastic theology and preaching was seen as a side duty. Martínez was not a gifted theologian and his aim with his foundation, apart from quashing rumours of his venality, was to increase the importance of the study of Scripture within the Order.

Despite the retirement of Sotomayor in 1643 a Dominican replacement was not placed on the Council of the Inquisition, in spite of the Order’s right. Diego de Arce y Reynoso50 - the Inquisitor General - claimed that there were too many ecclesiastics on the Tribunal, and there was not enough money to pay for them. Furthermore he argued: lo segundo y más principal y q[ue] pide toda la atención i cat[ólic]o zelo de V.M. es q[ue] los religiosos de la orden de S[an]to Dom[ing]o y los de la Comp[aní]a de Jesús están divididos en dos escuelas contrarias y de conocida oposición a cerca de muchas opiniones. 51

This letter was sent to the King in July 1644 when the Dominican alternatives were presented as Francisco de Araujo - a contemporary of friar Pedro’s from San Esteban and retired Catedrático from Salamanca - Juan de Santo Tomás and Juan del Pozo.

In this instance Arce’s wish was honoured, and again in 1646 when Juan Martínez had replaced Juan de Santo Tomás on the list. Following the death of Sotomayor, however, Martínez’s influence with the King obviously overpowered Arce’s, and on 16.10.1648 Martínez was elected to the Council. Arce’s opposition to the Dominicans was not overlooked by Martínez or friar Pedro, and, indeed, friar Pedro was careful to show his correspondence with Arce to Martínez, in order to avoid any misunderstandings.52 It must also be remembered that these five years of increased legal representation on the Tribunal and lack of a Dominican representative were the years which saw the spectacular re-trial of Gerónimo de Villanueva.

Juan Martínez’s position as Confessor Royal was technically a religious one, but it was seen by him and by others as a political one. In his book Discursos theológicos y políticos he wrote that in 1646 in Saragossa “por diferentes juntas, que allí tuvimos todos los ministros que asistíamos, y acom-pañavamos a Su Magestad”53 we decided business. In one of the later discursos of this book he discussed the question of whether theologians or jurists were better bishops, and came to the foreseen conclusion that theologians were best. There can be little doubt that this argument was in part aimed at his rival Diego de Arce y Reynoso, by far the better known jurist-made-bishop of his times.

Back to Biographical Index

Doña Catalina de Aragón Fernández de Córdoba, Count-Duchess of Olivares

Catalina Fernández de Córdoba was the daughter of Enrique Ramón de Aragón Folch y Cardona, fifth Duke of Cardona and Catalina Fernández de Córdoba, the daughter of the fourth Marquis of Priego and Juana Enríquez de Ribera, the daughter of the second Duke of Alcalá. She was thus a cousin of the Duchess of Medinaceli. Catalina was the sister of don Luis de Aragón y Cardona, sixth Duke of Segorbe y Cardona, Vicente de Aragón, Antonio de Aragón and Pascual de Aragón. 54 She was married to Luis Méndez de Haro y Guzmán in 1626 to further Olivares’ political aims of the 1620s, which were to gain the influence of her father in his Catalonian lands.

Doña Catalina had four children who survived childhood. Gaspar de Haro y Aragón, Marquis of Liche, who Barrionuevo claims to have had psycho-logical problems55, and who tried to blow up the Retiro Palace.56 He married first Antonia de la Cerda and then Teresa Enríquez 57 with whom he had a daughter Catalina, who married the tenth Duke of Alba. Antonia de Haro y Aragón, the eldest daughter, was married to the tenth Duke of Medina Sidonia, in an attempt to re-establish the fortunes of the house of Guzmán. Juan Domingo de Haro y Aragón married his cousin the seventh Countess of Monterrey, and Manuela de Haro y Aragón married the Count of Luna. These marriages are to be explained by the political influence enjoyed by her husband, Luis de Haro.

During Haro’s absences from Court doña Catalina looked after his interests. In late 1645 Haro went to Cádiz to supervise the arrival of the treasure fleets, and doña Catalina was left in Madrid to balance the Haro influence against that of his uncle, Castrillo. In order to help her in her work she employed a secretary - don Francisco de Oriar. It is obvious that she was an astute politician and enjoyed considerable personal influence. Her level of political influence led her into conflict with her father-in-law, the fifth Marquis of Carpio.58 She had considerable authority with her husband, along with a large degree of mutual affection. 59

Doña Catalina maintained a regular correspondence with friar Pedro since before 1645 until her death from a cancerous tumour, following childbirth, in November 1647.60 She was religiously orthodox and interested in devotional sculpture.61 She was an affectionate and caring parent, returning from a period of convalesence to care for a sick child in the summer of 1647.62 It was through doña Catalina that the Tapia group were brought into closer contact with the Haro connection.

The Functionaries: Don Antonio de Contreras, Don Antonio de Camporredondo, Don Francisco Antonio de Alarcón63 and José González

Antonio de Contreras y González Bernaldo de Quirós was from a very old Segovian family. He started his administrative career as the Juez Mayor de Vizcaya in the Chancery of Valladolid on 21.10.1617. He remained in this position until 21.2.1622 when he was promoted to the Contaduría Mayor de Hacienda as an Oidor. On 1.9.1630 he was elected as a Councillor of Castile in a supernumerary position and two years later was given the job of attending the Council of Finance as one of the observers from the Council of Castile. On 6.10.1638 he was made a member of the Chamber of Castile.64

Antonio de Camporredondo y Río was from an equally old family from Soria. He went to the Colegio Mayor of San Bartolomé and in 1609, at the age of 30, was made an Alcalde de Crimen in the Chancery of Granada. He served as Alcalde for five years before being made Oidor on 30.6.1614, where he stayed two years before being transferred as Oidor to Valladolid. On 29.3.1621 he was promoted to Court as an Oidor on the Contaduría Mayor de Hacienda where he was joined by Antonio de Contreras a year later. On 6.5.1628 don Antonio was promoted to a supernumerary position as Councillor of Castile and in 1632, two months before Antonio de Contreras, he was made the observer of Finance sessions of the Council of Castile. In March 1639 Camporredondo was elected to the Chamber of Castile and throughout this period continued to serve on the Council of Finance, being made honorary President in 1643. He retired from Finance in 1648 at the age of seventy but continued in his other positions. 65

José González was the son of an obscure lawyer from Arnedo. José González himself also studied law. His career rise was much more meteoric than those of Contreras and Camporredondo, but it followed the same basic pattern. In 1624 he was elected to the position vacated by Diego de Riaño y Gamboa as Fiscal to the Chancery of Valladolid, and two years later was promoted to Court as the Fiscal to the Cárcel de Corte. (16.11.1626) He served there for just over a year until on 8.1.1628 he was made Fiscal to the Council of Castile, and a year and nine months later was given a supernumerary position on the Council. Three years later his rise was complete, having been made a member of the Chamber of Castile on 1.5.1632.66

Don Francisco Antonio de Alarcón’s career was less dramatic than José González’s. He was made the Alcalde de Hijosdalgo in Valladolid in 1613, from where he was promoted to Oidor in Granada to occupy the place vacated by Camporredondo in 1616. In 1622/3 he went to Naples on the King’s business - a sure sign of impending promotion - and on his return on 17.2.1624 he was given a supernumerary position on the Council of Indies, where he would have made the acquaintance of don García de Haro, future Count of Castrillo. In 1628 Alarcón was again sent to Naples and as a result was given a position on the Council of Castile (16.3.1628) on his return. On 13.9.1634 Alarcón was made a member of the Chamber of Castile. In 1643 he was made Governor of Finance and in 1644 President. He was to die occupying this post three years later in November 1647, to be replaced by José González.67

These four figures were the financial “genii” of the reign of Philip IV. The state of the Catholic Monarchy’s finances does not testify to their great success. In 1638 they sat on the Junta de la Moneda and in 1650, along with the Count of Peñaranda - Gaspar de Bracamonte68 - they sat on the Junta de Medios. José González served as President of Finance from 1647 until 1651, when Antonio de Camporredondo was brought out of retirement to re-occupy the office. (1651-2)

Both González and Camporredondo founded mayorazgos for their children, Camporredondo founded a mayorazgo with an income of 1,000 ducados per year for his son Antonio who also followed him in an administrative career, receiving his first position as Fiscalin Valladolid in 1641.69 González founded a mayorazgo for his son, and his daughter-in-law, on her death, left a fortune of 1,138,434 reales (103,494ducados).70 When compared to the fortunes of the higher nobility, even the fortune accumulated by González is moderate. Although it is undeniable that González significantly improved his financial position during office, there is really no comparison between his fortune and those accumulated by, for example, Osuna, Olivares and Monterrey. Councillors of Castile earned 55,000 reales (5,000 ducados) a year. Presidents of the Councils of Indies and Finance earned 100,000 reales(9,090ducados) a year. This may be compared to the 22,000 ducados paid to Infantado for his part in the war in Catalonia, and the 266 ducados a year paid to University Professors.71

Janine Fayard states that “el más fiel amigo de José González fue su colega del Consejo D. Antonio de Contreras, con quien participó en numerosas juntas.”72 Friar Pedro had a close correspondence with Antonio de Contreras and used his influence to help Oviedo obtain a habit of Santiago for his son Luis. Contreras and Camporredondo shared similar religious views, and were both in favour of the ban on comedies.

José González - the eminence gris of Olivares - maintained, as did the other three men, his influence after the fall of his previous mentor. If anything, his influence increased after Olivares’ fall, all of which points to the basic stability and continuity of the administration throughout the reign of Philip IV. González, Camporredondo and Contreras were all remarkable for their extreme longevity.

The Count of Castrillo

Don García de Haro was the second son of the fourth Marchioness of Carpio, doña Beatriz de Haro. His brother, don Diego de Haro, the fifth Marquis, was the brother-in-law of Olivares. Don García, as a younger son, was sent to university - he was a colegial of Cuenca in Salamanca - in order to prepare him for an administrative career. Armed with his doctorate, he obtained a position as Oidor in Valladolid on 19.3.1619. There he served with Antonio de Camporredondo, Antonio de Contreras and Diego de Riaño y Gamboa. While in Valladolid he formed a relationship with the daughter of one of the other oídores - Christóval de Paz - who was a divorcee. With Jerónima de Paz he had an illegitimate son - Luis de Haro y Paz.73 In 1623 don García’s powerful connections procured him a place on the Council of Orders and on 17.2.1624 a supernumerary position on the Council of Castile. In 1625 he was elected to the Chamber of Castile and began to be known as don García de Haro y Avellaneda. This change of name was due to his impending marriage with the third Countess of Castrillo, doña María de Avellaneda Enríquez de Portocarrero which took place in 1629. Shortly before the wedding don García began to appear in the papers of the Chamber of Castile as don García de Avellaneda y Haro. In 1626 don García was made temporary Governor of the Council of Indies and between 1628-1632 was elected to the Councils of State and War. On 27.11.1632 he was made permanent Governor of Indies now using the title of Count of Castrillo. 74 The income from don García’s estates was very moderate: around 8,000 ducados a year. In 1622 he obtained the habit of Calatrava, and in 1634 a habit of Santiago for his illegitimate son, Luis. 75

Don García was a frequent member of juntas on which he served along with José González, Antonio de Camporredondo, Antonio de Contreras and Francisco Antonio de Alarcón. During the King’s absence from Court in 1641-1642, Castrillo remained at Court as an assistant to the Queen. He was instrumental in the overthrow of Olivares in 1643. He hoped that his cultivation of the Queen’s favour would bring him power, but on her premature death in 1644 he was forced to share power with his nephew, don Luis de Haro, always the more popular minister due to his more flexible character. From 1647 he maintained a correspondence with friar Pedro, who described him as an “inteligente y antiguo”76 minister.

Upon the death of Haro in 1661, Castrillo became the head of the Haro faction, sharing power with the Count of Peñaranda - an old associate - and the Duke of Medina de las Torres, don Ramón Felípez Nuñez de Guzmán. Between 1662 and 1668 Castrillo occupied the position of President of Castile, although constant ill health reduced his level of influence. In 1648 he married two of his legitimate children, doña Beatriz and don Gaspar, to don Juan Fernández Manrrique, Marquis of Aguilar, and doña María de Toledo, grand-daughter of the Duke of Alba, respectively. These marriages reflect the level of political influence he enjoyed in 1648.

Don Luis Méndez de Haro y Guzmán.

Don Luis Méndez de Haro y Guzmán was the eldest son of Diego de Haro, fifth Marquis of Carpio, and doña Francisca de Guzmán, sister of the Count- Duke of Olivares. He had a younger brother Enrique. He became Duke of Montoro following the peace of the Pyrenees, and, on the death of Olivares, inherited from him the titles of Count of Olivares and Marquis of Liche. His son, don Gaspar, used the title of Marquis of Liche, while his wife became known as the Duchess Countess of Olivares, forcing Olivares’ widow, Inés de Zúñiga, to use the title of Duchess of San Lúcar. This latter title, after lengthy litigation, was inherited by Olivares’ ex-son-in-law, the Duke of Medina de las Torres. 77

Medina de las Torres had been married to doña María de Guzmán, Marchioness of Liche, to the chagrin of Haro, who, it was supposed, would become her husband. This started a rivalry between the two which “culminated in 1664, in the grand romantic fashion of a fatal duel between one of Medina’s sons and a grand-son of Castrillo.” 78 Through the influence of his uncle Olivares, Haro married the daughter of the Duke of Cardona. The Cardona family maintained a traditional rivalry with the family of Enríquez de Cabrera - the Dukes of Medina de Río Seco, Admirals of Castile. To this rivalry Haro brought the Guzmán influence. In the late 1620s, through his uncle, Haro was made gentilhombre de la boca.

After the fall of Olivares in 1643 Haro enjoyed an increase in influence at the Court of Philip IV. He maintained, as Olivares before him, daily audiences. This led him to be referred to as the new valido, although he was never officially named as such. Haro controlled many juntas at Court, most significantly the Junta de Estado. It was not, however, until 1648, with the death of his father, that he inherited a formal position at Court: that of caballerizo mayor. Stradling describes him as “a kind of co-ordinator, responsible in policy to the Council of State, through the King.”79 Increasingly from 1655, until his death in 1661, he became more and more unpopular.

Luis de Haro was described in almost all correspondence as having a smooth charm and strict regard for etiquette and protocol. Friar Pedro described him as “del buen talento y agrado y buena atención”. 80 Stradling claims that Haro had to dissimulate his desire to become valido, which he did with consummate skill, in order to appease the group of nobles - Medinaceli, Infantado, etc. - who had propelled him into power. 81 It is unproven whether Haro wished to be valido, or whether he himself shared the opinion that kings should rule without them. Friar Pedro believed that Haro was the valido, for he was of the opinion that: “dado que aya de aver mynistro de ese género de recursos y audiencias no tengo por malo el agrado.”82