32 KT2 - Charles's accession and the Comuneros revolt, 1516-29

Enquiry Frame and Chronology

This is a Paper 3 depth key topic. The task is not to write a biography of Charles V or a general story of early modern Spain. The official enquiry asks you to explain:

• why Charles's accession in 1516 mattered;
• why Cardinal Jimenez de Cisneros was important;
• why the Comuneros revolted and why the revolt was significant;
• why the revolt was defeated, especially the role of the great nobles;
• what changed afterwards in Charles's rule, including his stay in Spain, relations with the nobility and church, and relations with the Cortes of Castile.

Keep the timeline under control:

The central judgement is this: the revolt failed as a bid to control Charles, but it succeeded in changing Charles's understanding of Spain. Before 1520 he treated Castile too much as a resource base for Habsburg policy. After 1522 he made Castile the political and emotional centre of his monarchy more than he had done at accession.

Accession and Cisneros

Charles's accession was significant because it transformed the monarchy created by Ferdinand and Isabella. Their marriage had joined the crowns dynastically, but Castile and Aragon still had different laws, institutions, Cortes and political expectations. Charles inherited not a single centralised Spain but a composite monarchy. Castile was especially important because it was richer, more populous and more directly useful for taxation than the Crown of Aragon.

The succession was also awkward because of Queen Joanna. Joanna, the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, was the lawful queen of Castile after Isabella's death in 1504. However, she had been politically isolated because of her mental instability and because powerful men found it convenient to rule in her name. When Ferdinand died in 1516, Charles proclaimed himself king alongside his mother. This created a tension that mattered later: if Joanna remained queen, could rebels claim that they were defending Castile through her rather than rebelling against monarchy itself?

Charles's wider inheritance made the accession more dramatic. He had been brought up in the Low Countries, surrounded by Burgundian advisers. He inherited Burgundian and Habsburg interests as well as Castile and Aragon. In 1519 he would become Holy Roman Emperor. To some European observers, this looked like the rise of a prince of extraordinary power. To many Castilians, it looked like a danger: a young foreign ruler might use Castilian taxation to pay for wars, elections and offices beyond Castile.

That is why Cardinal Jimenez de Cisneros was so important. Cisneros had already been a major figure under the Catholic Monarchs: Archbishop of Toledo, reforming churchman, former confessor to Isabella, and experienced royal servant. After Ferdinand's death he acted as regent in Castile until Charles arrived.

Cisneros mattered in several ways:

Cisneros was not a miracle worker. His attempts to create a militia were unpopular with nobles and towns; his authority rested partly on age, reputation and emergency rather than affection. He also died in November 1517 just as Charles was arriving to take personal control. Still, his importance is hard to overstate. He prevented the accession crisis becoming a rebellion before Charles had even set foot properly in Castile.

The problem was that Cisneros could only bridge the gap. He could not solve the deeper issue: Charles had to convince Castilians that he was their king, not merely a Burgundian-Habsburg ruler extracting Spanish resources.

Foreign King and Outbreak

The revolt of the Comuneros did not break out because Castilians rejected monarchy. Most rebels claimed that they were defending the kingdom's laws, privileges and common good against bad government. The danger for Charles was that this language made resistance look loyal. Rebels could say that they opposed foreign ministers, unlawful taxation and royal absence rather than kingship itself.

The first cause was the foreignness of Charles's court. Charles arrived in Spain in 1517 having grown up in the Netherlands. He did not initially speak Castilian fluently, and many leading posts around him were held by Burgundian or Flemish advisers. The most resented figure was often Guillaume de Croy, Lord of Chievres, Charles's powerful adviser. Another grievance came when the young Guillaume de Croy, Chievres's nephew, was given the wealthy archbishopric of Toledo after Cisneros's death. To Castilians, that looked like the capture of Spanish offices and church wealth by foreigners.

The second cause was money. Castilian towns had long expected the king to negotiate taxation through the Cortes. At Valladolid in 1518, the Cortes recognised Charles but also asked him to learn Castilian, respect Castilian laws, live in the kingdom, and avoid giving offices to foreigners. These requests show that the crisis was visible before the revolt. The Cortes was not simply a tax machine. It was a place where cities expected to state grievances and bargain.

The crisis intensified after Charles was elected Holy Roman Emperor in 1519. The imperial election was glorious for Charles but alarming for Castile. It raised the fear that Castile would fund a ruler whose attention would be drawn to Germany, Italy and the Low Countries. When Charles needed money before leaving Spain, he summoned the Cortes to Santiago in 1520 and then La Coruna. The subsidy was granted, but only after pressure and controversy. Some city representatives were seen as having betrayed their towns by voting money before grievances were properly answered.

The third cause was royal absence. Charles left Spain for Germany in May 1520, leaving Adrian of Utrecht as regent. Adrian was learned and loyal, but he was another foreigner at exactly the moment when Castilian political society wanted reassurance that Castile would be governed by Castilians for Castilian interests. Charles's departure confirmed the worst fears of many towns: the king had taken their money and gone.

The fourth cause was urban and local political grievance. The name "Comuneros" came from the comunidades, the communities or municipal bodies of Castilian towns. Cities such as Toledo, Segovia and Salamanca feared loss of local liberties and resented royal officials, especially where corregidores and royal influence appeared to override municipal interests. Some artisans and urban groups also had economic grievances, including concern about taxation, trade, wool exports and the interests of great noble or merchant elites.

These causes interacted:

The outbreak spread during 1520. Toledo became an early centre of resistance, with Juan de Padilla emerging as a leading figure. Segovia also resisted, and its representative Rodrigo de Tordesillas was killed by townspeople after returning from the Cortes grant. Royal attempts to discipline Segovia escalated the conflict. On 21 August 1520, royal forces seeking artillery from Medina del Campo set fire to the town when resistance blocked them. The burning of Medina del Campo was a turning point because it made royal government look violent and illegitimate. More towns joined the movement.

The rebels then formed the Santa Junta, first associated with Avila and then Tordesillas. This mattered because the revolt was no longer only local disorder. The Junta tried to become a representative political body for Castile, claiming to speak for the communities of the kingdom. Its programme included limits on foreign office-holding, tighter control over taxation, respect for Cortes procedures, and a demand that the king reside in Spain.

The most dramatic move was the appeal to Queen Joanna at Tordesillas. If Joanna had actively endorsed the Junta, the rebels could have claimed that they were loyal to the true queen against corrupt government. But Joanna refused to become an effective political leader. That left the revolt with powerful language but uncertain legitimacy.

Significance and Radicalisation

The Comunero revolt was significant because it raised a constitutional question: who could speak for Castile when the king was absent or badly advised? The rebels were not modern democrats, and they were not trying to create a parliament in the modern sense. But they did argue that the king should respect the kingdom's laws, consult properly through the Cortes, and use Castilian resources for Castilian needs. That made the revolt more than a tax riot.

The revolt also mattered because it revealed the weakness of Charles's early relationship with Castile. The Catholic Monarchs had strengthened royal authority, but their success depended on cooperation with towns, nobles, clergy and councils. Charles initially inherited the authority without the trust. His accession showed that dynastic right was not enough. A king who did not appear to understand local political expectations could face collective resistance.

The Santa Junta's demands are useful for understanding the movement's significance: