240
THE MESTA
fines, including tithes or diezmos granted to the orders by the
papacy, which were collected not only from permanent residents
in the encomiendas, but also from visiting migratory flocks.1
There were in addition to these various tolls called rondas, which
were levied ostensibly for services rendered by the military orders
in the suppression of golfines and other rural marauders.2 The
normal rate of the ronda was two sheep from every thousand, and
the total number thus collected in any one year was limited by
royal edicts usually to about seven hundred.3
The diezmos or tithes collected of the transhumantes by the
orders because of the latter’s services to the faith were, like the
ordinary ecclesiastical diezmos, never levied in tenths. The rates
varied from one-twentieth to one-fortieth; in fact, they were
usually called medios diezmos. This was explained in a decree
of Sancho IV, issued in 1285, which commanded that, since
shepherds were already paying their regular diezmos at full rates
in their home towns, they should not be required to pay more
than a fraction of such tithes in their southern pastures.4 By the
sixteenth century, most of the medios diezmos of the orders had
become fixed at twenty-five sheep per thousand; and a third of
the sheep thus taken, or their money equivalent — the ‘ pontif-
ical third ’ — were handed over to the crown, the remainder
being retained by the order.5
The establishment of royal control over the military orders in
the sixteenth century was indeed a boon to the sheep owners,
since it meant that the tolls once paid to more or less unscrupu-
lous fiscal agents of the Orderswere thenceforth to be administered
1 The sheep owners resident in the encomiendas usually paid their diezmos to the
local churches and not to the orders; cf. Bull. Ord. Milit. Calat., pp. 208-209;
Fernandez Llamazares, op. cit., pp. 206 ft.
2 See above, p. 89, n. 2.
s Bull. Ord. Milit. Calat., p. 202; Arch. Mesta, A-3, Alhambra, 1555.
t Quad. 1731, pt. r, p. 17.
6 Ibid., pp. 32-27; Nueva Recop., lib. I, tit. 5, Ieyes 6-8; Arch. Mesta, C-2,
Calatrava, 1556. Arch. Mesta, A-5, Alcudia, 1558, contains a royal edict forbidding
the collection of morruecos (breeding rams) as part of the medios diezmos. Bull.
Ord. Milit. Calat., p. 209; Arch. Mesta, C-2, Calatrava, 1556 (data from the thir-
teenth century) : agreements between the crown and Calatrava dividing the medio
diezmo receipts equally between them.
TAXES UNDER THE HAPSBURGS AND BOURBONS 24!
by the more friendly officers of the king. Furthermore, all dis-
putes were settled by the Council of the Orders, which was affili-
ated with the Royal Council, and was therefore uniformly partial
to the Mesta.1 On the once vexatious question of tolls and dues,
sixteenth-century autocracy thus brought most welcome friendly
relations between the migrants and the orders; almost the only
solace, in fact, which came to the Mesta during these declining
years of its prestige.2
Ecclesiastical establishments which collected the usual local
dues, xnontazgos, portazgos, etc., met with the same treatment
during this century as that accorded the various towns and nobles.
Occasionally some of the larger monasteries were given special
consideration, and their tax privileges were investigated by royal
commissioners. As a rule, however, the entregadores, encouraged
by the rigorous absolutism of the Catholic Kings and Charles V,
felt themselves quite equal to denouncing the tax claims of such
dignitaries as the bishop of Leon or even the archbishop of Toledo,
primate of all Spain.3 But the Chancillerias soon appeared as the
defenders of the cherished separatism, and the orders and mon-
asteries turned to them for aid in upholding their privileges.
Like the towns, the ecclesiastical establishments found these high
courts ready and eager to defend them against the Mesta and
its staunch ally, the Royal Council.4
The two ecclesiastical taxes with which the Mesta was con-
cerned were the cruzada and the diezmo. The former has already
been discussed, in connection with the question of the disposal
of mostrencos or stray animals. It will be recalled that the par-
ticular interest of the Mesta in this pious fund for the crusade
against the infidel arose from the fact that strays were claimed
1 Arch. Mesta, T-2, Terrinches, 1527; H-ι, Herrera, 1533; A-5, Alandia, 1558;
A~3, Alhambrosa, 1553; C-2, Calatrava, 1556.
2 The problem of rentals for pasturage belonging to the orders was more trouble-
some for reasons indicated below, pp. 327-335> passim.
• Arch. Mesta, A-5, Alcazar de Consuegra, τ529; V-2, Vegamiin, r536; T-2,
Toledo, 1551.
4 The earliest Chancillerfa decision on this point against the Mesta and in favor
of a religious establishment was rendered in r541. Arch. Mesta, B-3, Bonar, 1541.
This was later accepted as a precedent in many similar cases.