long serving purposes. There were many threats to the Spanish lands at the time of Charles
reign in Spain including from the Ottomans as well as the Corsairs that sailed the
Mediterranean. The fight against the infidel has been attributed to religious and financial
motives as well as territorial and political aspirations although no real gains or losses really
materialised although Tripoli was lost to the Turks in 1551. The Corsairs were much more of a
constant threat and many various battles and victories including the conquest of Algers in 1525
by Barbarossa meant that Charles focused much of his time in attempting to control the
Mediterranean and defeat the thieving corsairs. These conflicts with the corsairs have been
regarded by some, as wasted efforts and pointless campaigns, as the corsairs were not empire
builders. Some historians have also criticised Charles’s lack of interest in the North African
lands that were his to conquer, however it has been questioned as a counter attack what in fact
North Africa realistically would have offered him as well as how much he could have done
with the little amount of backing he had at this time from other powers. Another aspect of
Charles Spanish policy that has been seen as both a successful endeavour and also a failure was
the battle against Francis I the king of France, that was being fought in Italy. Although by some
it has been seen as a distraction from his other dominions and the cause of his frequent
absenteeism, as well as a huge financial drain, others have taken a more positive outlook
regarding it as highly important in that he was protecting his Italian lands, a vital action to
ensure continued control of the Mediterranean as well as the land. However it is hard to ignore
the argument that with this pre-occupation with the wars in Milan that Barbarossa and his
forces were given a chance to grow and build up power, which proved to be very costly to
Charles in years to come.
Charles owed much of his success to his victory over the Comuneros revolt in 1520. He was
able to re-establish his authority over the towns by reappointing his royal agents, the
corregidores and the Castilian Cortes seldom troubled him after the Comuneros revolt. Charles
now dictated that delegates to the Cortes should attend with full powers of decision-making.
Henceforth, he found the delegates more amenable to royal persuasion once they had left their
towns and arrived at the Cortes. This authority over the Castilian Cortes can be contrasted to
Charles's difficulties with the Estates General of the Netherlands, where delegates continually
had to refer back to those who had sent them. In addition, in Castile Charles refused to allow
the Cortes to make the granting of supplies to the Crown dependent upon the redress of
grievances. When the Castilian Cortes attempted to assert such a principle in 1523, Charles
forced them to back down, confident of his position as recent victor over the towns of the
Comuneros. From this time on he was free to accept or reject the petitions of the Castilian
Cortes at will. The obstacles posed by the towns to royal authority had, in effect, disappeared.
The Castilian Cortes became little more than a tax-voting body. It met 15 times during
Charles's reign, usually when he returned to Spain in need of money. The Cortes invariably
voted substantial subsidies to the Crown. However, some historians have noted that the
completeness of Charles's victory over the Comuneros revolt enabled him to make some
concessions to the aspirations of the towns. The Crown promised to reduce the burden of
indirect, or sales, taxes on Castile. The Crown also paid greater attention to the quality of the
corregidores and to monitoring their conduct in office. Finally, the Crown tried to ensure the
loyalty of the representatives of the towns at the Cortes by bestowing upon them favours and
patronage. It can be argued, therefore, that an important factor in explaining Spain's political
stability after 1522 was the triumph of royal authority over the Castilian towns and over the
Castilian Cortes. This was, perhaps, the most important legacy of the Comuneros revolt.
it has been argued that Charles's partnership with the Castilian nobility- was one of the major
pillars of his success in ruling Spain. The Castilian nobility enjoyed substantial advantages
under Charles. Their pride was flattered and their self-interest satisfied as Charles increasingly
loosened his ties with his Burgundian lands and put Spain at the centre of his empire. Castilian
nobles found lucrative employment in the running of Charles's empire. In addition, Charles
exempted the nobilities- from the heaviest tax burdens. The absenteeism of the monarch also
provided opportunities for the nobility to consolidate and advance their own interests. During
the Comuneros revolt the nobility had proved their value to the Crown in the maintenance of
effective royal government. In its aftermath, Charles was careful to avoid offending them. But
the victory of the nobility over the Comuneros rebels brought them into a longer-term alliance
with a monarchy much strengthened in its own right.
Success and stability in Spain depended also on the absence of religious division. Under
Charles, Spain presented a unified Church, committed to Catholic orthodoxy. The religious
upheaval occasioned by the Protestant challenge in other parts of Europe hardly touched
Spain. By 1558 there had been only 105 cases of Lutheranism tried in Spain, of which 66
involved foreigners. Even the ideas of moderate Catholic reformers, such as Erasmus, were
suppressed from the 153Os onwards. Charles's maintenance of Catholic orthodoxy was greatly
aided by the conservative religious instincts of the Church in Spain and of his Spanish subjects.
However, Charles gave his personal approval to the suppression of new religious ideas. He
supported the work of the Spanish Inquisition, a ruthless tribunal for the trying and punishment
of religious heresy. In the last year of his life Charles personally ordered that Protestants
uncovered at Valladolid and Seville be immediately put to death. Some historians have
criticised Charles for holding a narrow and rigid intellectual and religious life in Spain, however,
he viewed with great pride his success in protecting country from the contagion of religious
heresy.
Although in Spain after 1522 there was a remarkable period of political peace some historians
do not accept that this was due to the success of Charles’ rule. He certainly was successfully
overawing and suppressing the overt political resistance of the early years of his reign. However
this does not necessarily signify that grievances evaporated or that all hostility dissolved. As
this period in history is one before the age of opinion polls and extensive written records it is
difficult to obtain a truly accurate measurement of the attitudes and opinions of people, but it
has been argued that the relative tranquillity of the post 1522 period betokens less an
enthusiastic acceptance of the Hapsburg succession and more a resigned submission to Charles
superior force. There is some evidence of popular hostility to Charles and also a feeling of
unease and foreboding in the stamens of those in positions of power and responsibility.
Throughout Charles’s reign the meetings of the Castilian Cortes urged Charles to reduce his
financial impositions and return to Castile to attend their problems. Similarly it is clear that
Charles’s representatives in Spain grew increasingly alarmed at developments in the country.
Empress Isabella in the 1530s repeatedly asked Charles to return to Castile and address its
problems, as did Philip in the 1543. Some historians have argued that the situation was not
much better in Aragon, and that by ignoring it Charles allowed dangerous levels of resentment,
frustration and violence build up and there was a rebellion during the first three years of the
reign of Philip II suggesting that although Charles did seem to enjoy success in containing
active opposition, the contentment and loyalty of his subjects did perhaps not come with it.
It is his financial managements of Spain that have evoked most criticism and been seen as the
least successful fraction of his government. When Charles rose to power he came to see Spain
as the centre of his world empire spending more time in Spain than he did in any other part of
his empire. It was in Spain that he retired and was buried in. This commitment to Spain
stemmed not only from the fact that it was a key source of revenue for the Emperor but also
from a genuine affection that developed in regard to his Spanish inheritance. However it was
Spain that bore the brunt of his vast imperial demands. He even said that he could not be
sustained, except by his realms in Spain. In reality he meant Castile. Traditionally the most
important tax the Crown raised was the alcabala, a sales tax and it was payable by all classes of
society. However in 1534 Charles allowed it to be replaced by a local lump sum payment. Its
yield subsequently fell as inflation reduced its value. As the amount derived from the alcabala
fell, Charles became increasingly reliant on the servicio, a sum raised by the Castilian Cortes.
The servicio became, in effect, a regular tax and not, as it had been previously, a subsidy voted
periodically by the Cortes to the Crown. Charles’s income from the servicio more than trebled,
rising to 410,000 ducats in 1555. The nobility were exempt from this tax. In addition, Charles
received substantial revenues from the Church in Spain and from his possessions in the
Americas. From the latter he was the recipient of an average of 220,000 ducats per year, much
of it in the form of silver bullion.
The situation deteriorated form the 1530s onwards when despite exploiting such sources of
revenue as fully as he could they proved to be insufficient to his needs. It became increasingly
difficult to increase revenues from other parts of his empire and Charles was forced to turn
more and more to Castile. His first option was borrowing. He raised interest-bearing loans
(juros) from his subjects and guaranteed repayments from the Crown’s ordinary revenues. By
1556 the repayments of the juros consumed about 65% of the Crown’s normal income. Further
loans were obtained, at escalating interest rates, from international bankers. They were
guaranteed on the security of the Castilian Crown. Charles also sold public offices and
certificates of nobility to augment his revenues. Against the background of such financial
difficulty the tax exemptions of the Castilian nobility became increasingly out of place. In 1538
Charles attempted o bring them into the regular system of taxation by introducing a new tax on
food, the sisa. Like the alcabala, this was to be a tax on consumers payable by all. A general
Cortes was called at which the Castilian nobility as well as the towns were represented. The
nobility refused to approve the new tax. Charles dropped the sisa, aware of the value of a loyal
nobility to the successful governing of his kingdom.
Charles was constantly spending more than he received on revenues and an increasing
proportion of his revenues had to used to finance his debts and this was the state that his royal
finances remained in until the end of his reign and by the year 1557, the year after his
ascension, Philip II was forced to suspend all payments from the Castilian treasury and to
convert the Crowns debts into juros. Spain, and in particular Castile, paid a heavy price for
Charles’s financial administration. This extensive borrowing caused enormous damage to the
Spanish economy in the longer term and fed price inflation.
It can perhaps be concluded that although many he faced many difficulties and there is a degree
of failure in some aspects of his ruling, e.g. the financial depression he left Spain in, and the
delegation of authority to his deputies, he maintained a considerable degree of personal control
and that he did succeed in enlarging his power during his time as king of Spain. He experienced
his greatest success when he was able to work with political elites, and, in particular with the
Spanish nobility and overall his governing in most areas of his rule was largely successful.
