Search

In this article the conflicts and alliances between different Dukes of Pastrana, lords of a Grandee household, and their relatives are analysed from two viewpoints. The first perspective shows how litigation between early-modern aristocratic siblings for family inheritance was a very common phenomenon. Secondly, litigious kin were allies in the political and social arena. With these features in mind, this paper provides an explanation of aristocratic behaviour as the consequence of the composite nature of aristocratic identity and the two juridical bodies used by the elites. According to this juridical theory, sovereigns were juridically composed of two bodies. The first one was political, representing eternal royalty. The second one was natural, meaning the physical person of each king. As will be stated in the article, this royal conception of the two bodies was adopted by the nobility and played an important role in aristocratic family conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this article is to show how the composite and international domains and fiefs of early modern Spanish Monarchy aristocracy allowed noble households to become a type of transnational juridical space. From the later centuries of the Middle Ages onwards two related developments took place in Europe: the formation of composite monarchies and the emergence of (nonetheless composite) elites. In early modern Europe, the existence of an aristocracy with domains in different kingdoms was a matter of fact. Litigation was an everyday activity for the aristocracy, and as a consequence of its cosmopolitan fiefs and inheritances noblemen and their lawyers were compelled to be familiar with several national legalities and property systems. As a consequence, news regarding courts, suits, local rights and privileges reached the main households of different kingdoms on an ongoing basis. Because of this, household offices and archives became spaces where cosmopolitan legal expertise and knowledge were filed and studied. Noblemen quickly discovered the advantages of the confusion and the conflicting use of foreign legislation in the courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]