Women’s Fashions and Politics in Seventeenth-Century Spain: The Rise and Fall of the Guardainfante *
Abstract Women’s clothes were at the center of political debate in the Spain of Philip IV (r. 1621–65), and no garment inspired more controversy than the wide-hipped farthingale, or hoopskirt, known as the guardainfante. Considered scandalous with its reputation for hiding illicit pregnancies, the guardainfante was banned in 1639. Nonetheless, the guardainfante became more popular than ever and turned into an enduring icon of Golden Age Spain during the reign of Philip’s second queen, Mariana of Austria (1649–65). Despite the guardainfante’s high level of visibility, most notably in court portraits by Diego Velázquez, very little is known about the historical experiences of the women who wore it. This article demonstrates that real women really did wear the guardainfante in a variety of contexts outside of portraiture and the theater. In Madrid and in cities throughout the Spanish empire, women of different stations and convictions participated in the political culture of their times by making, disseminating, and debating this controversial garment.
Daily Life in Spain in the Golden Age
In "Daily Life in Spain in the Golden Age," distinguished French historian Marcelin Defourneaux gives us an account of life in Spain during the period starting from the succession of Philip II (1556) to the death of Philip IV (1665). In this fascinating scholarly account, the author relies upon literary works and travel accounts written during this 'golden age' to present an overall picture of Spanish society of that time. Rich accounts of political and economic developments are woven into the narrative, and the author also covers the importance of Catholic faith and the emphasis upon personal honor.
Judicial politics in Britain: Patrolling the boundaries
This study considers judicial policy‐making in Great Britain by noting the peculiarly British institutional restraints on judicial action of parliamentary sovereignty, the resulting subordination of all courts to the legislative branch and the absence of a codified charter of rights or constitution. Though there is no judicial power to annul legislative or executive actions, British courts and judges still play a small, but significant, role in policy‐making through the common law and, in particular, through judicial review of adminstrative actions. A written bill of rights would likely draw courts further into the the political arena and politicise the appointment of judges.