power of the nobles, who, until their reign, had been like so many
petty sovereigns, each with his independent state, and preserving his
authority by the sword alone. When Ferdinand and Isabella, however,
united their separate kingdoms under one denomination, neither Castile
nor Arragon could be considered as an absolute monarchy. In Castile,
the people, as representatives of the cities, had, from, early ages,
obtained seats in the Cortes, and so in some measure balanced the
power of the aristocracy. The Cortes, similar to our houses of
parliament, could enact laws, impose taxes, and redress grievances,
often making the condition of granting pecuniary aid to the Sovereign,
his consent to the regulations they had laid down, and refusing the
grant if he demurred. In addition to these privileges of the Cortes
of Castile, the Junta of Arragon could coin money, declare war, and
conclude peace; and what was still more remarkable, they could be
neither prorogued nor dissolved by their Sovereign without their own
consent. Alluding to the Castilians, a few years after the period of
our tale, Robertson says--

"The principles of liberty seem to have been better understood,
by the Castilians than by any other people in Europe. They had
acquired more liberal notions with respect to their own rights
and privileges. They had formed more bold and generous sentiments
concerning government, and discovered an extent of political
knowledge to which the English themselves did not attain till
nearly a century afterwards."

When we compare this state of things with the misery and anarchy
pervading Castile before the accession of Isabella, we may have
some idea of the influence of her vigorous measures, and personal
character, on the happiness and freedom of her subjects. The laws