1

First Year Graduate Student ConferenceMay 1 - 2, 2014

Department of History, University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, IN

Our Ladies of the Monastery: Position and power at the Monastery of Santa Maria La Real de Las Huelgas

A.L. CastonguayUniversity of Notre Dame

In 1180, Alfonso VIII of Castile and his wife, Leonor Plantagenet, founded a community

for aristocratic women religious in Burgos, then part of the kingdom of Castile.1 Over the

proceeding years, the monastery benefitted tremendously from its relationship with the crown

and members of the Leonese and Castilian nobility. It served not only as a burial place but

also received tax relief through royal privileges and grew its holdings through many

donations, both royal and non.

During the last century, the monastery has been studied for its architecture, its music, its

economy, and its tombs. What has mostly gone unnoticed by historians, however, was the

issue of social hierarchy and power within Las Huelgas. In particular, few have examined

how social rank influenced who acted as the representative “head” of the community.

Although most of the women at Las Huelgas came from what is broadly called “the nobility”

social differences existed. Difference in rank by birth appears to have been preserved, even

trumping social rank by office among the nuns yet little attention has been paid to this

1 Araceli Castro Garrido and José Manuel Lizoain Garrido Documentación del Monasterio de Las Huelgas de Burgos (1116-1230), Vol 31 (Burgos: Ediciones J. M. Garrido Garrido, 1987). No. 5 All subsequent volumes in this series will be abbreviated to DMLH, though the editor’s name will be preserved. For a recent investigation into the motives of Las Huelgas’ founders, especially Leonor Plantagenent, see Rose Walker, “Leonor of England, Plantagenet queen of King Alfonso VIII of Castile and her foundation of the Cistercian abbey of Las Huelgas. In imitation of Fontebraud?,” Journal of Medieval History, 31 (2005), pp. 346-368.

2

phenomena. Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer examined the historical role of the Abbess of Las

Huelgas from 1180 -1900 through primary source documents but relied on the assumption

that an “abbess” was always regarded as the head of a monastic community. Likewise, José

Manuel Lizoain Garrida and Juan José García’s extensive economic and social study of Las

Huelga salso assumed that the position of abbess automatically outranked all others and

subsequently devoted little time to the question of internal rank. Recent studies into

Cistercian houses, such as Esther Pascua’s explored the ways in which social rank

circumscribed economic exchanges, gifts, and donations among the laity but not the monastics

themselves.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the social and ecclesiastical communities

presented in documents related to El Monasterio de Santa Maria la Real de Las Huelgas from

the years 1284-1321CE. Its aim to compliment earlier studies on the Monastery of Las

Huelgas and those investigating the importance of social standing within medieval Iberia,

creating a more robust social portrait of the Monastery and its actors. Due to their

prominence in the available documentation, the emphasis shall rest upon the figures of the

abbess and the señora of Las Huelgas and their hierarchical relationship with each other vis-a-

vis the Castilian-Leonese monarchy. The documents in question come from the series

Documentacion del Monasterio de Las Huelgas de Burgos, volumes 33 and 34 (Burgos, 1987), which

sought to publish transcriptions of all available records held by the monastery of Las Huelgas

from the medieval period.

A Note on Terminology

Throughout this paper, the term “abbess” and “señora” will appear, both in reference to a

particular office and its office holder. The figure of the abbess is well-established both in

3

monastic history and as a general term and therefore, does not need much in the way of

explanation; any documents referencing the position of “abbess” will be included. Conversely,

the term and position señora is a slightly different issue. First, the term in medieval Castilian

refer to a noble status, more akin to the English title of “lady.” Second, it should also be noted

that the document counts includes those in which a “señora-like” figure was present [Image 1].2

The reasons for including non-titled “señoras” in the larger category are three-fold. First,

in a series of documents dated from March 27 1285 - April 3 1285 confirming earlier royal

privileges granted to Las Huelgas, Sancho IV begins by addressing his aunt, Infanta

Berenguela, followed by the abbess, María Gutíerrez. Though Infanta Berenguela is not

named as “señora of Las Huelgas” in these documents, her position as the first named member

of the community and the stated familial relationship with Sancho IV is both telling and worth

investigating since it mirrors the position Infanta Blanca, the first “Señora of Las Huelgas”

occupies in later documents. Additional documents from Sancho IV in 1285 continue this

naming pattern, with a noticeable shift from April 5, 1285 towards naming only Infanta

Berenguela and simply referencing the position of the abbess.3 Second, this pattern continues

after Infanta Berenguela’s death in 1287, with Infanta Isabel, Sancho IV’s daughter addressed

in a document from March 20 12894. Whether or not Isabel was acting in a similar capacity

as Infanta Berenguela is questionable. If we take the document at its word and Isabel was

indeed Sancho IV’s legitimate daughter, she would have only been five or six years of age in

1289, and soon married in 1291. Nevertheless the insertion of Infanta Isabel into documents

2 This also follows Balaguer, who included Infantas prior to 1295 in his brief discussion of the Señora. See Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, La Abadesa de Las Huelgas. Estudio teologioco juridico, 3rd Edition, (Madrid: Ediciones RIALP, S.A.,1988) p. 236

3 Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 37, is the first instance where the Abbess is not named outright, despite the fact that María Gutíerrez remained Abbess until May 1287.

4 Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 62. The salutation to Isabel and the Monastery of Las Huelgas reads “La infante donna Ysabel, mi fiia, e la abbadesa e el conuuvento del mio monestario de Sancta Maria la Real de Burgos”.

4

relating to Las Huelgas appears to suggest that the concept of a señora was one that could

transcend the abilities of a specific person. Third, the appearance of the title “señora of Las

Huelgas” in 1299, several years after Infanta Blanca is formally elevated to the position seems

to indicate that the title itself was, perhaps, the last aspect of this role to develop.5 Therefore,

to restrict documents to those only in which the term “señora of Las Huelgas” appears creates

a false picture of this unique role.

I: Señora vs Abbess: The Historical Question

Following the principles laid down in the Rule of St. Benedict and the Cistercian monastic

tradition, the abbess was the leader of any female monastic community.6 She was not only a

fully professed woman religious who had given up her worldly ties, including her familial

connections, but was also the elected spiritual head of the nuns who she governed, responsible

for the salvation of their souls.7 The abbess was at the top of a monastery’s administrative

hierarchy. Internally, all other positions at the monastery reported to her and she had

absolute jurisdiction over the professed members of the community.8 Externally, the abbess

represented the monastery in dealings with other ecclesiastics such as abbots, bishops, and

popes, and with non-ecclesiastics such as secular lords.

What the Rule of St Benedict did not mention, however, was the presence of a “lady” of

the monastery. The Rule does speak of a “Superior” but does not indicate that it was a well-

defined position held by a single person. Yet one of the interesting components about the

documents from Las Huelgas is the presence of a señora of the monastery. Moreover, these

5 Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 103.6 St. Benedict. The Holy Rule of St. Benedict, Ch. II: “What Kind of Man the Abbot Ought to Be”. Trans. Rev.

Boniface Verheyen, OSB. Grand Rapids: Christian Classics Ethereal Library, 1949. Electronic version http://www.ccel.org/ccel/benedict/rule.html

7 Rule of St. Benedict, Ch. II “On the Election of the Abbot”8 Rule of St. Benedict, Ch. V “Of Obedience”

5

señoras appear to be fully-fledged members of the community, professed as nuns of the

Cistercian order and, as such, subject to the rules of the Order and the authority of their

abbess. Unlike the abbess and other monastic positions, however, the señora was one

appointed by the king of Castile-León.

The figure of a “Señora” of Las Huelgas appears in the documentation in the later quarter

of the thirteenth century, though the title itself does not appear until 1299. In a document

dated April 15 1295, Sancho IV declares that his niece, Infanta Blanca of Portugal has

professed her desire to become a nun at Las Huelgas and, moreover, that she will “take

command of the lordship (“señorio”), directing and guarding all that [the Abbess and

Monastery] needs.”9 It is worth noting that despite this decree, Blanca herself is not titled

“Señora”. Moreover, the community of Las Huelgas already had a representative other than

the Abbess. A document dated October 30, 1293 names one “don frey Juan” who appeared

to have the power to negotiate property exchanges between Las Huelgas and other

monasteries.10 This same “frey Juan”, acting as a representative of Las Huelgas, had

appeared in earlier documents going back to 1286.11 Nevertheless, by 1299, the title “señora

de Las Huelgas,” appears regularly in documents and continues until Infanta Blanca’s death

in 1321.

II Head of the Community: Relations with the Crown

Given that Infanta Blanca was the first to be styled “Señora of Las Huelgas” it would

stand to reason that prior to 1295-1299, the Abbess would still be the de facto community head

9 DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 103. “…rogamos a la infanta donna Blanca, nuestra sobrina, que quisiese seer monia dese monesterio e tomar el sennorio dese logar e comienda e guarda de todo lo uuestro…”

10 Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 90. This document names Berenguela López as abbess and Urraca Alfonso as prioress.

11 Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306) Vol. 33, No. 44, 46, 61

6

and recipient of royal address. From 1284-1290, Sancho IV issued 38 documents to the

women at Las Huelgas all of which dealt with legal rights and privileges. 31 of these

documents addressed the Abbesses, María Gutíerrez and Berenguela López, by name while 7

documents only addressed the title “Abbess.”12 In contrast, the “Señora,” —at this time, the

Infanta Berenguela and later the Infanta Isabel— was named in 33 documents and omitted

completely in only 5 of the documents.13 The period 1291-1294 produced no documents in

which the señora was named or addressed but that the same time, royal documents sent to the

Abbess, Berenguela López, addressed her only by title.14 Thus, even before Infanta Blanca

joined the community, the position of señora appears to have been more important than that of

the Abbess when it came to royal documents.

After the arrival of Infanta Blanca at Las Huelgas, the diminution of the Abbess’ status in

royal documents becomes more apparent [Image 2]. From 1291-1321, the Abbesses

Berenguela López and Urraca Alfonso are addressed by title in 68 documents but Urraca

Alfonso is name in only 5 of them.15 Part of the exclusion of the Abbess’s name could be the

result of Fernando IV’s minority. A number of documents from the years 1295 until 1302,

when Fernando IV came of age, are confirmations of earlier privileges pasted into a certain

script which names only Infanta Blanca and the “abbadesa y el convento del monasterio”16.

12 For those documents which named the Abbess between 1284-1290, see Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33, 34, 35, 50, 55, 62, 63, 69, 70. For those with only the title “Abbess” see Ibid., DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 30, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 48

13 For those which name the Infanta/señora during the same period, see Ibid., DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 48

14 Ibid., DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 79, 82, 87, 89, 92, 93, 94, 95, 9815 For those that list Abbess by title, see Ibid.,DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 78, 79, 82, 87, 89, 92, 93, 94,

95, 98, 103, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 141, 142, 146, 152, 156, 157, 162, 166, 168, 171, 176, 179, 181, 182, 184, 186, 189, 190, 194, 195, 196, 197; Araceli Castro Garrido, DMLH (1307-1321), Vol. 34 (Burgos: Ediciones J. M. Garrido Garrido, 1987), No. 202, 203, 206, 209, 212, 213, 232, 235, 237, 239, 240, 241, 242, 244, 246, 247, 255, 256, 274, 292, 296, 297, 298, 300, 302, 307, 308, 317, 363. For those that list Urraca Alfonso by name, Ibid., DMLH (1307-1321), Vol. 34, No. 203, 232, 286, 287, 337

7

Finally, the Señora, Infanta Blanca, is named in 150 documents from 1295-1321, including 37

in which she appears without any mention or reference to the Abbess [Image 3].17 The fact

that Infanta Blanca’s name is frequently included while that of the Abbess Urraca Alfonso’s is

not suggests that by the early fourteenth century, the Señora had, at least in relation to royal

interactions, trumped the Abbess.

Second, in all of the documents under consideration, the infantas at Las Huelgas are

rarely mentioned without reference to their title or their familial rank. For starters, the title

“infanta” signals a close relationship with both the nobility and the king. Only those who were

the legal daughters of the king or married to the son of the king (el infante) could hold this

title.18 Women who were illegitimate daughters of kings, like a number of women within the

Las Huelgas community, could only be titled “doña.”19 None of the Abbesses under

consideration held the rank of “infanta.” Thus, on a social scale, the infantas outranked all

other women including that of the Abbess. When this factor of royal rank is combined with

the reality that the infantas were always addressed before the Abbess in royal documents and

that more documents were addressed to them instead of the Abbess, it becomes clear that the

position of infanta more than the title or position “Señora of Las Huelgas” mattered in terms of

non-ecclesiastical social hierarchies.

Complementing the social rank of infanta is the explicit reference to each Infanta’s

familial relationship with the King. When Sancho IV confirms the rights and privileges

granted to Las Huelgas by his predecessors, he not only addresses Berenguela as “Infanta

16 Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No.109, 111, 112, 113,17 Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 137, 138, 139, 143, 148, 161, 162,

173, 175; Castro Garrido, DMLH (1307-1321), Vol. 34, No. 204, 210, 211, 225, 238, 248, 250, 251, 252, 257, 271, 282, 283, 288, 289, 304, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 319, 328, 329, 333, 336, 338, 339

18 See “infanta” in the Real Diccionario Español, http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=Infanta19 For instance, Beatriz Fernández, the illegitimate daughter of Infante don Felipe, brother of king Alfonso

X, only titles herself as nun ,“monia.” She does, however, cite that don Felipe is her father See Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 101

8

doña Berenguela” but “our aunt,”referencing the fact that Infanta Berenguela was the sister of

Sancho’s grandfather, Fernando III of Castile. Likewise when his young daughter, Infanta

Isabel, is at Las Huelgas, Sancho IV not only cites her status as “infanta” but also her status as

“daughter.” Infanta Blanca is listed not only listed as “infanta” and later “Señora of Las

Huelgas” but also as the “niece” of Sancho IV, the “cousin” of Sancho IV’s son, Fernando IV

and, due to her familial relationship with Fernando IV’s wife, Constança of Portugal, the

“aunt” of Alfonso XI.

The last issue at play concerns access to the royal court. Burgos, the city in which Las

Huelgas was located, had been a royal favorite for much of the thirteenth century. It not only

received the status of “royal city” but the kings of Castile -León were often in residence there

several times a year. As such, this proximity to the king and the royal court may have allowed

the Abbess and the Señora to petition the crown directly. The 34 documents issued by

Sancho IV to the monastery between March and May of 1285 — all dated from Burgos—

contain variations on the phrase “because of the pleas of the infanta and for doing good to the

Abbess”20 At the same time, this presumed face to face interaction does not alter the naming

practices within the documents. A document issued on April 10, 1285 describes the Infanta

Berenguela and the Abbess María Gutíerrez as presenting Sancho with an earlier

confirmation of a privilege, but does not address each woman equally. “The infanta doña

Berenguela, my aunt, and the abbess of the monastery of Burgos have shown me a privilege

from the king don Alfonso, my great-grandfather … which I confirm…”21

20 The phrase that appears in the 34 documents issued from Sancho IV in Burgos between March and May of 1284 reads “…pro rue go de la infanta donna Berenguella, nuestra tea, e por gazer bien e merçed a donna Mari Gutierrez, abbadessa del monastery de Sancta Maria la Real de Burgos…conffirmamos este privilegio e mandamus que vala.” Castro Garrido and Lizoain Garrido, DMLH (1284-1306), Vol. 33, No. 27 for quoted text; for the series, see Ibid., No. 5-44.

21 Ibid., DMLH (1284-1306) Vol. 33, No. 38. “La infanta donna Berenguella, mi tia, e la abbadesa del monasterio de Burgos me mostraron priuilegio del rey don Alfonso, mi trasauuelo, confirmado del rey don Ferrando, mi auuelo, e del rey don Alfonso, mio padre, que Dios perdone, e que yo confirme...”

9

At the same time, a restriction on the presence of abbots at the Cortes from 1295 and the

1298 order from Pope Boniface VIII that women religious were to be cloistered may have

created a space where the Señora took precedence over the abbess. As members of the royal

family and vassals of the king, the infantas themselves may have been required to attend court,

or at least send a representative, thereby circumnavigating these ecclesiastical bans.

Documents from Las Huelgas, especially those issued during the reign of Sancho IV, cite a

whole roster of witnesses and testifiers required to attend court. Moreover, this requirement

may explain Sancho IV’s elevation of Infanta Blanca to the position señora. In order for

Infanta Blanca to “take command of the lordship” and “see to its needs” she would have

needed access to the court and, more specifically, to the king or his representatives. The

requirement to either maintain a presence at court or send a representative also explains the

noticeable increase in the number of documents addressed to the Señora after 1300, including

those which omit the Abbess completely. Thus, the elevation of the Señora over that of the

Abbess most certainly related to the social position of the Señora both as an infanta and as the

representative chosen to handle matters between the monastery and the Crown.

Concluding Remarks

The objective of this essay was to explore the ways in which social rank affected the

depiction of the abbess and the señora as the head of the monastery of Las Huelgas vis-a-vis

the crown of Castile-Leon, in order to highlight the visible difference between social power

and religious office. The señora not only acted as an official representative of the monastery in

its interactions with the Crown, but additional titles and ranks held by the señoras lead to

powers not available to other nuns at Las Huelgas, including that of the abbess. For all the

power vested in her by ecclesiastic convention, the abbess of Las Huelgas is an increasingly

10

marginalized figure in the available documents, while the señora became more important.

What remains to be seen is whether or not this power dynamic played out after the death of

Infanta Blanca in 1321 but, as has been demonstrated here, the question of social rank and its

relationship to monastic hierarchy is one that bears further attention by present and future

scholars alike. Simply assuming that the abbess is always the head of a monastery omits too

much of the available evidence.

11

Image 1: The presence of a señora in the documentation of Las Huelgas 1284-1321

Image 2: The presence of a señora addressed by name and rank compared to that of an abbess addressed by name or rank, 1284-1321

12

Image 3: Percentage of the señora and abbess by name and title in documentation from Las Huelgas, 1284-1321