República Mista

Title page for volume one of República Mista (1602), A Treatise on Three Precepts by Which the Romans Were Better Governed.
Author	Tomás Fernández de Medrano
Original title	República Mista: Sobre los Tres Preceptos que el Embajador de los Romanos Dio al Rey Ptolomeo Respecto al Buen Gobierno de su República.
Language	Early Modern Spanish and Latin
Series	1 of 7
Subject	Political philosophy, governance, reason of state literature, moral-philosophical discourse, Catholic political theology, Spanish Baroque political literature
Genre	Mirrors for princes, political treatise
Publisher	Juan Flamenco
Publication date	5 March 1602
Publication place	Royal press, Madrid, Spain
Media type	Print
Pages	158

República Mista (English: Mixed Republic)^[1] is the title of a seven-volume legal-political treatise from the Spanish Golden Age by Tomás Fernández de Medrano, a Navarrese-Castilian nobleman, lord and divisero of Valdeosera, secretary of the holy chapters and assemblies of Castile, knight of the Order of St. John, philosopher, jurist, magistrate, theologian, royal counselor, and secretary of state and war to the Dukes of Savoy. While only the initial part was published, volume one was brought to light by Medrano's son Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval, and published by Juan Flamenco in Madrid on the royal press in 1602 by decree of King Philip III.^[2] Composed in Early Modern Spanish and Latin, República Mista codified a doctrine of governance grounded in a mixed republic combining monarchy, aristocracy, and timocracy. The first volume is structured around the foundational precepts of religion, obedience, and justice.^[3]

Situated within the mirrors for princes tradition, República Mista codifies the moral and juridical responsibilities of rulers, magistrates, and subjects, and is noted for its formal treatment of delegated authority in early modern Spain.^[4] Fray Juan de Salazar's 1617 treatise explicitly cited the doctrine codified by Medrano in the República Mista (1602) to define the Spanish monarchy as guided by virtue and reason, yet bound by divine and natural law.^[5]

Without naming him, the República Mista aligns with the anti-Machiavellian tradition by rejecting the view that religion functions only as a political instrument. For Medrano, religion is the foundation of moral order and the precondition for legitimate governance.^[6]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano's codified doctrine, as outlined in the first treatise of República Mista, emphasizes a system of mixed republic explicitly opposed to absolutism, integrating monarchy, aristocracy, and timocracy into a single moral and legal order grounded in religious devotion. He teaches that each form of rule embodies particular virtues as well as inherent vices, but when combined within a mixed republic, their strengths serve to limit one another's weaknesses. This mixed model, he maintains, offers the most effective system for securing justice, stability, and the common good.^[7]

His República Mista was a written seven-part series, with each volume addressing three key precepts drawn from the seven most flourishing republics in history. Only the first volume was published, devoted to the Roman precepts of religion, obedience, and justice, rooted in ancient philosophy and applied to governance within the Spanish Empire.^[3]

The work is structured as a dialogue between King Ptolemy and ambassadors of the classical republics, each presenting three precepts of their polity. In its prologue, Medrano sets out this political doctrine in a style reminiscent of earlier Spanish literature influenced by Arabic traditions, combining narrative with philosophical reflection.^[8]

Tomás, who permitted his son Juan to bring the work to publication, explicitly stated he wrote seven treatises, publishing only the first, and included his original intent at the outset of the treatise:

I present only the first of seven treatises I have written, each addressing three points. This one focuses on the primary precepts of religion, obedience, and justice, to see how it is received. If it is well-received, the others will follow, collectively titled Mixed Republic. Since these matters concern everyone, I dedicate this to all, so that each may take what best suits their purpose.^[9]

In the first and only printed volume, Tomás Fernández de Medrano illustrates three Roman precepts through scriptural references, historical examples, and contemporary models of leadership. From classical antiquity, he draws on thinkers such as Cicero, Tacitus, Plato, and Aristotle, whose reflections on governance, virtue, and justice underpin much of his analysis.^[10]

Exemplary rulers including Lycurgus, Numa Pompilius, and Alexander the Great are invoked as models of wise and ethical leadership, while figures like Codrus and Aristides are cited for their self-sacrifice and devotion to justice.^[10] Medrano also praises leaders of his own era, such as Pope Sixtus V, Pope Pius V, and Pope Gregory XIII, for their clemency, piety, and commitment to social order. He incorporates mythological references as well, using Deucalion to symbolize political renewal, Atlas to represent endurance and structure, and Bacchus as an emblem of communal joy and harmony.^[11]

Although composed in the early seventeenth century, the first volume of the República Mista codified a doctrine of natural and divine precepts already present in earlier traditions across various civilizations. Drawing from classical, biblical, philosophical, legal, and royal sources, Tomás Fernández de Medrano codified these doctrines and precepts through the scholastic method, historically upheld in Spanish administrative practice and in the historical vocation of the Medrano family. The treatise united these inherited doctrines and precepts into a coherent system of lawful prosperity (medrar), grounded in virtue, service, delegated authority, and bound by natural and divine law. Together, the family generationally shaped dynastic, legal, educational, and cultural structures across the centuries.^[12][13][14]

Miguel Herrero García, in his introduction to Fray Juan de Salazar's book, declares:

Don Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval, of the house of the Lords of Valdeosera, is credited as the author of this book, published in Madrid in 1602 under the title República Mista. However, despite what the cover states, we conclude that the book was written by his father, Tomás Fernández de Medrano.^[15]

The Spanish bibliographer Nicolás Antonio, knight of Santiago, unequivocally attributes the authorship of the Mixed Republic to Tomás Fernández de Medrano.^[16] This father-son collaboration is echoed in the Orazion Consotoria dedicated to Lord Carlo Emanuel, Duke of Savoy, with Tomás as the author and his son Juan responsible for its publication. Similarly, the funeral oration honoring the virtues of King Philip II is also credited to Tomás Fernández de Medrano.^[17]

According to the royal printing license issued by Philip III of Spain, Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval discovered "a book titled A Treatise on Three Precepts by Which the Romans Were Better Governed" among the papers of his father, Tomás Fernández de Medrano.^[10]

Miguel Herrero García asserts that the royal printing license "leaves no room for doubt" regarding Tomás Fernández de Medrano's authorship. He states that this was not simply a harmless literary device of the time, citing several points: Medrano was alive when the license was granted, the book contains multiple first-person accounts of events in Italy, it simultaneously functions as a preserver of the oration by Charles Emmanuel I, Duke of Savoy, under whom Medrano served as advisor and secretary of state and war (1591—1598).^[18]

In his preface, Tomás Fernández de Medrano used a chivalric-metaphor to explain why he initially wrote República Mista anonymously:

Let no one inquire about the identity of this adventurer, who has dared to step into the public arena with a masked face, fearing the risk of gaining no honor. For that reason, I ask earnestly not to be commanded to reveal myself, for I come from the confines of a prison where I find myself, and I am running this course with these three lances. And if, due to their strength, I cannot break them, I humbly ask the judges to observe where the blows land. I promise they will all strike above the belt, and with such skill that no one will be harmed, offended, or dismounted from their horse. My intentions are truly good.^[19]

Born in Entrena, La Rioja, Tomás Fernández de Medrano of the influential House of Medrano held numerous civic, noble, and ecclesiastical titles. He served as Mayor, Chief Magistrate, Divisero, and Lord of Valdeosera, as well as a Knight of the Order of Saint John and Patron of the Convent of San Juan de Acre in Salinas de Añana.^[20] Medrano advised the monarchs of Spain and held high office abroad, including Secretary of State and War to Charles Emmanuel I, Duke of Savoy, and to Princess Catalina Micaela of Spain, daughter of Philip II.^[8]

From 1579 to 1581, he served as secretary to Prince Giovanni Andrea Doria, and later spent eight years in Rome under Enrique de Guzmán, 2nd Count of Olivares.^[8] He was appointed Secretary of the Holy Chapters and Assemblies of Castile, maintaining a continued role in both religious and political governance.^[20]

In his royal decree dated 25 September 1601, Philip III of Spain summarized the three precepts of the treatise in his own words:

Tomás Fernández de Medrano writes first, concerning the importance of kings and princes being religious in order to be more obedient to their subjects; the second, regarding the obedience owed to them by their subjects and the reverence with which they should speak of them and their ministers, councils, and magistrates; and the third, on the Ambassador's role among the Romans, where he discusses why it is important to reward the good and punish the bad.^[2]

Having summarized the three books of the treatise, Philip granted license and faculty for its printing throughout the Kingdoms of Castile for a period of six years from the date of the decree. This authorization followed the petition of Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval and the examination and approval of the work by the Royal Council. The decree established formal legal protection for the text and specified the penalties for unauthorized reproduction.^[11]

"Under the penalty that any person, without your authority, who prints or sells it, or causes it to be printed or sold, shall forfeit the impression made, along with the molds and materials thereof, and incur an additional fine of fifty thousand maravedís for each infringement. This fine shall be divided: one-third to the accuser, one-third to our Treasury, and one-third to the judge who passes sentence."^[2]

The decree further required that any reprinting within the six-year term conform exactly to the original inspected copy, signed on every page and at its conclusion by Juan Gallo de Andrada, Secretary of the Chamber. Each printed copy was to include the authorized errata. Printers were prohibited from producing the opening or first folio, or from delivering more than a single copy together with the original to the party financing the edition, until the work had been corrected and its price fixed by the Council. Only after this verification could the first folio be printed, followed by the royal decree, the formal approval, the established price, and the errata. In this manner, the faithful transmission of the doctrine was secured under royal law, with conciliar verification preceding distribution.^[11]

Philip concluded the decree with a directive binding upon all judicial authorities within his realms:

"We command our Council and all other justices thereof to observe and execute this our decree and its contents."^[2]

The royal decree was issued at Valladolid on 25 September 1601, signed by Philip III and countersigned by Luis de Salazar by order of the King.^[10] At the time of the decree, García de Medrano y Castejón had been appointed by the king to reform the Holy Military Order of Santiago, while serving as Minister of Justice and as a councilor of the Council of the Orders, the very bodies to which the command to observe and execute was directed.^[21][22]

Philip III's decree presents the precepts as the operative order of a Catholic monarchy already governing under divine and ecclesial law.^[2] By commanding the Council and all justices to observe and execute the decree and its contents, the Crown bound the judicial and administrative organs of the empire to the treatise's precepts of religion, obedience, and justice as the standard to be received, transmitted, and applied in public rule.^[2] In this context, Tomás codified an order already practiced in Spain, while parallel Medrano reforms supplied the institutional mechanisms through which the same doctrine was secured within the monarchy's juridical and educational bodies.^[2]

The six-year commercial term and the permanent command to observe and execute function as complementary elements within a single constitutional act. The commercial license regulated the authenticated distribution of the physical text, requiring that every reprinting conform to the Council-verified original before reaching any reader.^[2] By contrast, the command addressed to the Council and all justices contained no temporal limitation. While the commercial term protected the integrity of the book's transmission during the period of authorized printing, the command incorporated the doctrine's contents into the enduring obligations of judicial authority throughout the Spanish Empire.^[2]

Six years provided sufficient time for the authenticated edition to circulate among the institutions charged with its observance. The duty to observe and execute its contents did not lapse with the expiration of commercial protection.^[2] Tomás Fernández de Medrano had dedicated the work to all, so that each might take from it what best suited their purpose. The decree translated that dedication into institutional form through controlled distribution followed by permanent juridical obligation.^[2]

Philip III of Spain (1598–1621), ruler of the Spanish Empire at the height of its power, nevertheless faced challenges in governance.^[23][24] In the first volume of the República Mista, titled On the Three Precepts that the Ambassador of the Romans Gave to King Ptolemy Regarding the Good Governance of His Republic, Medrano frames his treatise as a codified doctrine upheld in Spain and focused on the three precepts of religion, obedience, and justice as the foundation of Spanish governance.^[10] Philip III's reign established the Pax Hispanica as a doctrinal enactment of these precepts, expressing the unity of religion, obedience, and justice in foreign and domestic governance. Through this, the monarchy was redefined by aligning Roman Catholicism with Hispanidad.^[25]

Early seventeenth-century Spanish political thought combined republican language, scholastic natural law, and classical classifications of government within monarchical frameworks described using republican and mixed constitutional language.^[26] As analyzed by Rubiés, this convergence produced persistent uncertainty over how unified royal authority related to plural structures of governance, including councils, magistracies, and representative institutions, in the absence of a settled account of their relation to sovereign power.^[26] The República Mista (1602) of Tomás Fernández de Medrano provides a doctrinal resolution of this problem. Medrano defines the Spanish polity as a mixed Republic ordered to the common good, governed by doctrine, harmonized with natural and divine precepts, and treating monarchy, aristocracy, and timocracy as enduring forms of governance operating within a single moral and legal order.^[4]

In this doctrine, delegated authority meant that sovereignty is unified in the prince under God, and the protection of the Holy Catholic Church was essential to maintaining his temporal stewardship, while the exercise of government proceeds through councils, offices, and virtuous magistrates selected according to service, merit, and equity.^[27] These institutions regulate the use of power, preserve justice, and maintain political stability without fragmenting the kings delegated sovereignty. The República Mista codified doctrine and precepts already upheld in Spanish governance, transmitted through the reign of Isabella I, Charles V, Philip II, and confirmed under Philip III.^[22][2] In the 1595 preamble to the Ordenações Filipinas, Philip II defines kingship as the administration of justice for the preservation of peace within the Republic.^[28]

The República Mista codifies this doctrine and transmits it as the universal model for delegated authority and sacral kingship. While the Ordenações Filipinas provided binding legal precepts of justice, merit, and equity within the Portuguese realm, the República Mista extended this doctrine and its precepts into a comprehensive mixed republic, applicable to the Spanish Monarchy as a whole, clarifying the relationship between unified sovereignty through delegation and plural forms of governance under God.^[4]

In the early 17th century, a strong royalist ethos emerged, asserting that the king was legibus solutus (not bound by laws) in civil matters, though still subject to divine and natural law. Phrases like scientia certa, motu proprio, and non-obstante facilitated the development of royal sovereignty, which was nevertheless distinguished from tyranny.^[29][30] This interpretation of royal power was so widely accepted that República Mista (1602) by Tomás Fernández de Medrano codified and reaffirmed the king's authority in civil affairs and taught that resistance to a legitimate ruler was contrary to divine and natural law, citing scriptural foundations from 1 Samuel 8 to Jeremiah 27.^[30]

Tomás teaches that free rulers possess the authority to make and enforce laws upon all, both generally and individually. This authority contains the symbols and acts of supreme sovereignty that jurists call the Regalia. He states that the Regalia may be distilled into eight primary points, so that their lawful exercise may be better understood and obeyed:

• Eight Primary Points of Regalia: To create and repeal laws. To declare war or establish peace. To act as the highest court of appeal. To appoint and remove high officials. To levy and collect taxes and public contributions. To grant pardons and dispensations. To set or alter the value and currency of money. To require oaths of loyalty and obedience from all subjects.

When rulers exercise these powers, either directly or through ministers to whom authority is delegated, subjects must not scorn or violate the authority of their superiors. Established by God through many decrees and testimonies, this authority must be respected and held as a source of majesty, even if at times it is administered by individuals who are unworthy and make it odious. Subjects must obey laws and ordinances without scheming or undertaking anything that undermines the dignity and authority of princes, ministers, and magistrates.

Tomás Fernández de Medrano asserted there are two types of authority:

• (1) One supreme and delegated authority, but not self-constituted, answerable only to God, responsible for giving an account to Him (structurally distinct and separate from absolutism).
• (2) Subordinate authority, bound by law and exercised by magistrates for a limited time under royal commission (e.g. a valido).^[3]

Tomás taught that any discussion of royal authority must begin with the classical distinction between the two forms of justice. He explained that philosophers divide justice into distributive and commutative, and that the first is most relevant for kingship.

• (1) Distributive justice concerns the rightful granting of honor, dignity, office, punishment, and reward according to each person's condition.
• (2) Commutative justice concerns the fair observance of promises, contracts, and reciprocal duty.

He cited the universal maxim:

Quod tibi non vis, alteri ne feceris "Do not do unto others what you would not wish done unto you."^[7]

Medrano emphasized that all justice is ordered toward the preservation of human society. It is the guardian of the laws, the defender of the good, the enemy of the wicked, and indispensable to all estates. Even pirates and highway robbers, he noted with Cicero, cannot exist without some form of internal justice among themselves. This demonstrates that justice is not only a virtue but a structural condition of any society, lawful or unlawful.

To characterize its supreme importance, Medrano invoked the Pythagorean Paul, who taught that justice is the mother from whose breast all other virtues are nourished. Without justice, he explained, no one could be temperate, moderate, courageous, or wise. In this sense, justice is not merely one virtue among many, but the foundation upon which the moral order rests and through which every other virtue becomes possible.

Tomás added that the perfection of justice requires an even higher standard. Drawing from Plato, he taught that true justice cannot distinguish among men on the basis of friendship, kinship, wealth, or dignity. It demands that rulers set aside personal pleasures and private benefits in order to embrace the common good, even at their own cost.

He explained that good governance requires the prohibition of anything doubtful, because uncertainty itself signals danger.

Equity is by nature so clear and resplendent that where doubt exists, injustice is near.^[7]

By this, Medrano affirmed that just rulers must banish ambiguity from public affairs. Justice provides the vigilant preservation of clarity, equity (aequitas) and the public good.

While many modern historians regard Philip III of Spain as a weak and disengaged monarch,^[31] Medrano presents a humble description in República Mista (1602):

Is there a greater example of justice and sanctity than the one shown by our Lord King Philip III in Valladolid? When constructing a passage for his own comfort and convenience, he graciously sent a request to a poor baker, asking him, with utmost respect, if he would allow the passage to go through a small room in his house. The baker, responding with loyalty and wisdom beyond his station, answered that the King's will should be done, as his life and livelihood were at the King's disposal. In return, the King rewarded this common man with generous gifts befitting a humble subject who had served his King like a true noble.

Anecdotes, such as the king requesting permission from a baker to pass through his home, illustrate Medrano's view of Philip III grounded in fairness and magnanimity.

Tomás Fernández de Medrano teaches that discretion and restraint are necessary virtues for subjects who live under a just Catholic king. He writes:

Interdum "Sometimes it is convenient not to know certain things."

He then cites Seneca:

Qui plus scire velle quam satis sit; intemperantiae genus est "Wanting to know more than is necessary is a form of excess."

Such restraint strengthens loyalty to the king, to his councils, and to his magistrates. It helps preserve a measure of peace in this life and reminds humanity that this world is not their lasting home. Therefore, the loyalty and silence of subjects toward their king and rightful lord, and toward his councils and magistrates, are crucial virtues within the populace and powerful means of attaining some peace in this life. He teaches that this peace reminds us "that we live and journey toward an eternal life, not this fleeting, mortal, and transitory one."

All great monarchies eventually fall. Nothing beneath heaven is immortal. Tomás therefore asks:

qui potest dicere immortalitatem sub coelo "Who can claim immortality under heaven?"

Subjects are instructed to pray that God preserve their holy, valiant, magnanimous, generous, just, wise, and compassionate king.

Tomás then describes Philip III's virtues. The king is holy because he has no disordered inclinations and entrusts difficult matters to wise and religious counselors placed beside him by divine providence. He is valiant because he understands that power collapses unless it is accompanied by real strength. For this reason he assembled a great fleet and army that humbled his greatest enemies without requiring bloodshed or his personal presence on the battlefield.

He is magnanimous because he could have annihilated certain princes for his advantage yet chose to show them mercy. Tomás cites Saint Isidore:

Plerunque princeps iustus etiam malorum errores dissimulare novit, non quod iniquitati eorum consentiat; sed quod aptum tempus correctionis expectet "A just prince often knows how to overlook even the errors of the wicked, not because he approves of their iniquity but because he waits for the appropriate time to correct them."

Medrano affirms that Philip III is just because he knows the gravity of governing well and has personally visited his realm, listening to and correcting the needs of his subjects.

Tomás then repeats the ancient warning that an emperor who encloses himself at home and sees only what others report will judge poorly. He quotes Diocletian:

Bonus, cautus, optimus venditur Imperator "The good, the prudent, and the excellent emperor is a rare treasure."

The king is prudent because although naturally inclined to hunting and war, he has set these aside for noble and sacred reasons, serving God, preserving his health, and benefiting his people. A ruler's moderation, he writes, reforms customs.

He is compassionate because, at the urging of Pope Clement VIII, whom he deeply venerates, he acted against the harsh maxim of Sallust:

Nemo alteri imperium volens concedit; et quamvis bonus, atque clemens sit, qui plus potest, tamen quia malo esse licet formidatur "No one willingly yields power to another; and even though he may be good and gentle, one who holds power is feared because he has the capacity to be otherwise."

Though kings generally believe that yielding is as shameful as defeat, Philip III yielded when justice and charity required it, choosing to safeguard the peace the monarchy enjoys. Tomás cites Saint Gregory:

Reges quando boni sunt, muneris est Dei; quando vero iniqui, sceleris est populi "Good kings are the gift of God, and wicked ones are the punishment of the people."

He concludes with a reflection on human nature. Those inclined to speak freely and condemn injustice often displease the powerful. Tomás recalls Tacitus:

Semper alicui potentium invisus, non-culpa, sed ut flagitiorum impatiens "One who is always disliked by the powerful is not guilty of wrongdoing but rather intolerant of wrongdoing."

For this reason he advises that those who seek peace and security will often prefer to live far from courts and the pressures of public life, where they may enjoy a more tranquil existence.

In his República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano presents Philip III as the model of a virtuous Catholic monarch, demonstrating that holy kingship is upheld not through force alone but through justice, prudence, mercy, and piety.

In 1617, Medrano's codified doctrine in the República Mista was fully embraced by Fray Juan de Salazar in his attempt to define the Spanish monarchy.^[32][33] In the República Mista, Medrano further advised King Philip III that royal withdrawal from public view could be perceived "as a form of religion," comparing the king's distance from his subjects to the veneration reserved for the Eucharist.^[34][35] In response to this vision, Philip III took the idea of royal inaccessibility even further than his father, restricting public access and delegating the management of audiences to the Duke of Lerma, reinforcing the king's sacred distance with the second type of authority.^[36][37] He balances sacred distance by arguing that what is rarely seen is more deeply revered, and that this deliberate isolation preserved the king's idealized image by concealing potential flaws, thereby legitimizing the presence of a valido to act as his public and political representative.^[38][39]

After affirming that reverence for God restrains the violent impulses of power and that princes must protect the sanctity of the Church above all, Medrano shifted to the classical figure who embodied these precepts most fully. Tomás Fernández de Medrano turned to the classical figure of Numa Pompilius to define the proper form of sacred kingship. Following the violent era of Romulus, Numa governed by moderation, peace, and religious example. Medrano used this contrast to show that a kingdom shaped by war and ambition can only be stabilized by a ruler whose virtues restrain the impulses of the people. Numa, in Medrano's account, performed the duties of government and then withdrew to contemplation of divine matters, cultivating a kingdom whose religious discipline made even foreign nations regard Rome as inviolable.

At the center of Medrano's political theology was the precept that the king exists so that his subjects may prosper (medrar). He expressed this using the foundational maxim of the doctrine:

Rex eligitur non ut sese moliter curet, sed ut per ipsum, qui elegerunt, bene beateque agant. A king is chosen not to care for himself but so that, through him, those who chose him may live well and prosper.

For Medrano, royal majesty depends on measured distance. The sovereign must avoid excessive familiarity and be known primarily through counselors whose own conduct inspires confidence. Drawing on the example of Tiberius, he wrote:

Continuus aspectus venerationem minorum hominum ipsa societate facit. Continual familiarity diminishes the reverence held for men by simple association.

From these teachings Medrano concluded that a king's dignity grows from his rare public presence and from the elevation of a trusted minister who serves as the visible executor of royal will. Philip III's restricted audiences, his disciplined reserve, and his reliance on the Duke of Lerma were therefore not signs of indolence or weakness. They were enactments of a sacral form of government in which distance magnified majesty and delegated authority allowed the people to live well and prosper, fulfilling the doctrinal standard Medrano had inherited and codified.

In a letter dated around 1607, Tomás Fernández de Medrano reported that Philip III and his ministers were well aware of the services he had rendered by sea and land, in peace and war, and of his political treatise concerning the governance of the Republic.^[40]

His Majesty was pleased by the book he wrote on the Republic (dedicated to the Duke of Lerma), in which he discussed, among other things, how important it is for kings and princes to be religious in order to be better obeyed by their subjects.^[40]

Medrano's República Mista significantly shaped Philip III's approach to kingship.^[41][42][39] His República Mista reinforced Madrid-Rome ties,^[43] and associated a religious foundation with the Spanish monarchy's "greatness" and prestige.^[44]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano's vision of kingship, rooted in sacred distance, obedience, and divine legitimacy, naturally called for a trusted intermediary to manage public affairs. In this context, the figure of the valido emerged not as a rival to the monarch, but as a functional extension of his will: a visible minister acting on behalf of an invisible king.^[45]

With the accession of Philip III in 1598, political literature increasingly turned its attention to the role of the valido. In República Mista (1602), Tomás Fernández de Medrano defined and defended the value and legitimacy of the valido through historical examples.^[46] Drawing on lesser-known figures such as Callisthenes, adviser to Alexander the Great, and Panaetius of Rhodes, companion to Scipio Aemilianus, Medrano confirmed that trusted confidants could serve not as threats to royal authority but as prudent and loyal counselors who strengthened effective governance.^[47]

He observes the value of such counsel:

We see that there has not been a great and prudent prince who did not have a servant as a faithful friend, someone (to discreetly moderate his passions, help him carry the burden, and speak the truth) with more authority than all others. Callisthenes served this role for Alexander, Panaetius for Scipio, and many other secretaries whose experience and prudence have brought much glory to the governance of many princes. These princes, if they are wise and experienced, shape their ministers to fit their needs. And conversely, expert ministers make prudent and glorious the princes who are not, if those princes are teachable. Happy, then, in my view, is the one who says this, and happy the republic when such a servant, friend, or valido proves to be of such a nature that the deeds of his heart and courage correspond in greatness to the one whom kings and princes ought to have. For where there is nobility of blood, and noble habits and customs, there can be nothing that does not reflect it. And so, what shall we say when to all this is added such zeal, goodness, and piety as we now see, witness, and experience?^[48]

Amid growing criticism of the valido (royal favourite) during the early reign of Philip III, Tomás Fernández de Medrano offered a contrasting perspective in República Mista (1602). While many contemporary thinkers viewed the concentration of royal trust in a single individual as a threat to authority, Medrano, writing under the patronage of the Duke of Lerma, defended the political utility of the valido.

He presented the figure of the valido not as a rival to the king, but as a necessary extension of royal governance, someone entrusted with distinct responsibilities that contributed to a more unified and effective administration.^[49] While defining delegated authority, Medrano simultaneously denounces favoritism and the corruption of courtly life. He strongly criticizes nepotism, flattery, and the promotion of the unworthy, urging sovereigns to honor merit and uphold justice as a foundational precept of their authority.^[50]

This vision of a prudent valido did not end with Tomás Fernández de Medrano, Lord of Valdeosera. His great-nephew, Diego Fernández de Medrano y Zenizeros, Lord of Valdeosera and Sojuela; a nobleman, a presbyter, and chaplain to Luis Méndez de Haro, Valido of Philip IV, carried the doctrine forward in a later panegyric-treatise titled Heroic and Flying Fame.^[51] He invoked figures such as Aristotle, Euclid, Apelles, and Lysippus to frame Haro's statesmanship as surpassing the achievements of antiquity. Where Tomás drew on classical examples to justify the role of the valido, Diego used them to exalt Haro as its most refined expression. His work immortalizes Luis de Haro, nephew and successor of the Count-Duke of Olivares, as an exemplary valido whose conduct embodied wisdom, restraint, and virtue, notably during his negotiations at the treaty of the Pyrenees.^[51]

The República Mista is openly dedicated to Francisco de Sandoval y Rojas, 1st Duke of Lerma, the first great valido, as its patron, dated 22 August 1601.^[6] Tomás Fernández de Medrano's son Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval, presented the valido of Philip III as he emerged with the rise of the valimiento system through delegated authority.^[5]

Medrano's son, Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval, addresses the 1st valido as follows:

The ship governed by two captains is endangered even without a storm. An empire that depends on more than one cannot endure, as experience teaches. If a second sun were joined to the fourth heaven, where our own sun shines, the earth would burn. Though this kingdom and monarchy may seem like the image of many bodies, it is but one, governed and animated by a single soul, when the members (as now) are united in preserving the whole, which is the public good. The King our lord made Your Excellency (God made it so) the captain of this ship, the soul of this body, and the sun that illumines us, knowing (as the Wise know) that in you resided the equal light required for such a role. From birth, you were as great in substance and form as you are now in action; all that was needed was a shadow to allow you, as His secondary cause, to exercise and extend the rays of your virtue across the globe. It seemed (and the world agreed) that Your Excellency's heart and spirit, like Augustus’, could hold such greatness. His Majesty daily recognizes the truth of his choice through the effects it brings. There is no one of good faith who does not wish this blessing to endure and to show gratitude to Your Excellency. I, as your most obliged servant, child of grateful servants, offer these three bouquets of Religion, Obedience, and Justice, colored with the civility that has ever cloaked Your Excellency. Though these are found in the garden of my father, open to all, there is no flower I would not cultivate especially for your service, as the universal father of the republic to whom all is owed. I humbly ask you to place them (so they do not wither) in the vessels of your grace, continuing the mercy Your Excellency has always shown us. In this, by your virtue and merits, we hope for what may be expected of so great a prince. To repay such a debt, I can only echo Ausonius: Nec tua fortuna desiderat remuneradi vicem, nec nostra suggerit restituendi facultatem ("Your fortune does not seek a reward in return, nor does ours offer the means to repay it").^[10]

Juan Fernández de Medrano's dedication presents Lerma's office, the valido, as situated within a historical succession of chosen delegates who exercise authority and mediate on behalf of their sovereign. In this formulation, the role is affirmed by Juan and his father Tomás as fully codified and operative within the Habsburg Empire, grounded in the authority of the Spanish monarchs as temporal stewards under God.^[52]

In the prologue, titled Princes, Subjects, Ministers, Medrano references ambassadors from various ancient republics to introduce precepts essential for maintaining a strong and enduring republic. Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas, historian to Philip III, recognized its importance, advising the king that it was essential to understanding the work. Medrano sought to unify twenty-one precepts to showcase the diverse yet essential precepts underlying effective statecraft. Medrano describes:

When Ptolemy, King of Egypt, was discussing matters with the most distinguished ambassadors of the most flourishing republics of that era, he requested from each of them three essential precepts or laws by which their nations were governed.^[53]

Each flourishing Republic and its corresponding three precepts represents one of the seven complete treatises Medrano had already written. Only the first, on religion, obedience, and justice, was published in 1602 as the first volume of the República Mista.^[10]

• The Roman ambassador said: "We Romans hold great respect and reverence for our temples and our homeland. We deeply obey the mandates of our governors and magistrates. We reward the good and punish the wicked with severity."
• The Carthaginian ambassador states, "In our republic, the nobles never cease to fight, the officials and commoners never stop working, and the philosophers continually teach."
• The Sicilian ambassador asserts, "Among us, justice is strictly upheld. Business is conducted with truthfulness. All are esteemed as equals."
• The Rhodian ambassador remarks, "In Rhodes, the elderly are honorable, the young men are modest, and the women are reserved and speak sparingly."
• The Athenian ambassador declares, "We do not allow the rich to be partial, the poor to be idle, or those who govern to be ignorant."
• The Lacedaemonian (Spartan) ambassador proclaims, "In Sparta, envy does not reign because there is equality; greed does not exist because goods are shared in common; and idleness is absent because everyone works."
• The Sicyonian ambassador explains, "We do not permit anyone to travel abroad, so that they do not bring back new and disruptive ideas upon their return; nor do we allow physicians who could harm the healthy, nor lawyers and orators who would take up the defense of disputes and lawsuits."

Medrano concludes that if these customs were upheld in a state, it would maintain its greatness for a long time. He encourages a deep study and thoughtful application of these precepts, integrating lessons from both sacred texts and historical accounts to guide governance and societal harmony.^[9]

República Mista begins with a foundational 16-page preface, establishing Medrano's vision of governance through history, philosophy, and divine law.^[10] The preface explores the foundations of politics and society, including the progression from family to municipality, province, and kingdom. Medrano defines politics as "the soul of the city," equating its role to prudence within the human body, as it "directs all decisions, preserves all benefits, and wards off all harms." This opening lays a conceptual framework for understanding the intricate balance of governance within a mixed republic. Focusing on the three essential pillars of religion, obedience, and justice, Medrano writes:

Divine justice and human governance are so closely intertwined that one cannot exist among men without the other.^[10]

Building on this conceptual framework, Medrano introduces three virtuous forms of government: monarchy, aristocracy, and timocracy, contrasting them with their corrupt counterparts: tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy in its degraded form. He explains that each virtuous form serves the public good, while the corrupt forms devolve into self-serving rule. By presenting these three opposites, Medrano reveals the need for a mixed republic that blends monarchy, aristocracy, and timocracy, creating a governance structure capable of resisting the vices of each individual system.

Drawing on historical and philosophical examples, Medrano demonstrates how this balance fosters societal harmony and stability while avoiding the pitfalls of purely singular forms of government. He teaches that each system degenerates when it loses its foundational virtues and becomes consumed by selfishness or disarray. In chapter three of República Mista, on justice, he writes:

For if Kings, Councils, and Magistrates on earth are the image of God, they should also strive to imitate Him in goodness, perfection, and justice, as our superiors imitate Him to the extent of their abilities, in order to induce true piety and virtue to those under their charge with their example (which is the most powerful thing). For just as the heart in the body of animals always remains the last to corrupt, because the last remnants of life remain in it, it seems appropriate that, having some illness entered to corrupt the people, the Prince and Magistrates remain pure and unharmed until the end.^[52]

Medrano views monarchy as the most natural and cohesive form of governance. A single ruler, he confirms, provides unity and decisiveness, ensuring that decisions are made in the interest of the entire state. He draws on philosophical reasoning, quoting Aristotle's assertion that "a multitude of rulers is not good," and emphasizes that a virtuous monarch must prioritize the public good over personal gain. However, Medrano warns of monarchy's potential to devolve into tyranny if power becomes unchecked or if rulers lack moral integrity. Medrano identifies monarchy as the closest reflection of divine governance, citing the singularity of God as the ideal for unity and authority:

As there is one God, creator and ruler of all, so should there be one prince, governing with wisdom and justice... the governance of one represents the order of nature, by which all things are reduced to a primary ruling precept, just as all celestial orbs and moving things are ordered by the prime mover. Hence, we observe in the universe a single God, creator and governor of all (Rex Deus quifpiam humanus est); in the bees, one queen; in the flock, one shepherd. And for the sake of peace and the preservation of all things, what is more appropriate than to concentrate power in a single ruler?^[10]

A monarch, he explains, must emulate divine virtues, prioritizing the common good over personal desires. Medrano warns, however, that monarchy can devolve into tyranny if the ruler strays from these virtues, emphasizing the need for piety and humility to align earthly authority with divine will. Regarding tyranny, he states, "A tyrant governs not for the people, but for his own desires, treating the state as his possession rather than a sacred trust." Tyranny arises when a monarch abandons justice and piety, becoming an oppressor rather than a protector.

Aristocracy, the governance by the virtuous, is extolled by Medrano for its focus on wisdom, experience, and the common good. He presents historical examples like the governance of Sparta, which achieved remarkable longevity and stability through a carefully structured aristocratic system. Medrano acknowledges that aristocracy is most effective when it selects leaders based on merit rather than privilege, but he cautions against its corruption into oligarchy, where power serves a narrow, self-serving minority. In aristocracy, Medrano sees the potential for collective wisdom and virtue to govern effectively. He compares the selection of aristocratic leaders to the idea of God entrusting His divine work to angels, revealing the importance of moral integrity and expertise:

Just as God surrounds Himself with those who serve Him faithfully, so too must an aristocracy be composed of virtuous and capable individuals.^[10]

Medrano acknowledges that aristocracy risks corruption into oligarchy if power is used for selfish ends rather than the public good. Such a system exploits the many for the benefit of the few, undermining the harmony of the state. He necessitates a divine moral framework to guide these leaders. Oligarchy, Medrano contends, is the result of aristocracy corrupted by greed and self-interest, stating that:

Oligarchy is nothing more than a conspiracy of the wealthy against the public, using power to advance their fortunes at the expense of justice.^[10]

Timocracy, which Medrano defines as governance by individuals of moderate wealth and merit, occupies a middle ground between monarchy and aristocracy. Drawing on Aristotle's insights, Medrano notes that this form of governance ensures that neither extreme wealth nor poverty dominates, fostering a more equitable society. However, he notes that timocracy is vulnerable to instability when personal interests outweigh collective responsibility. Medrano regards timocracy as a governance system rooted in moderation and equity, drawing parallels to God's justice in rewarding virtue and punishing vice. He writes:

Cities are well-governed when power rests in the hands of those with sufficient means to be invested in the public good without succumbing to greed... God's governance is neither arbitrary nor excessive, but measured and fair—qualities that must define a timocracy.^[10]

This form of government relies on individuals with sufficient means and merit to serve the public interest without succumbing to greed. Medrano warns, however, that without divine precepts to temper human ambition, timocracy can degenerate into chaos or selfish governance. Timocracy's opposite, Democracy, which he calls "a depraved form of republic," while acknowledging its appeal to liberty, is described as unstable and prone to excess. Medrano writes:

When the multitude rules unchecked, their passions replace reason, and the state suffers from the clamor of conflicting desire.^[10]

Medrano warns that unchecked democracy, though appealing in its promise of liberty, can easily descend into mob rule (ochlocracy), where fleeting passions overpower reason and governance becomes erratic.

Tomás Fernández de Medrano's vision culminates in the concept of a mixed republic, where the strengths of monarchy, aristocracy, and timocracy are interwoven to create a balanced and enduring system. For Medrano, only a divinely guided mixed republic can sustain lasting stability, equity, and justice, anchoring human governance in the civil, natural and divine laws of God:

From these three forms, philosophers composed a mixed Republic, saying that any form of Republic established on its own and in simple terms soon degenerates into the nearest vice if not moderated by the others; and that, to sustain Republics in proper governance, they must incorporate the virtues and characteristics of the other forms, for none of them fears excessive growth that might lead it to incline towards its closest vice and consequently fall into ruin. For this reason, many ancient and modern thinkers have held the view that the Republics of the Lacedaemonians, Carthaginians, Romans, and other renowned Republics were composed and justly blended from Royal, Aristocratic, and Popular powers. To avoid any confusion or ambiguity, we can say that if authority lies in a single Prince, the Magistracy is a Monarchy, as in Spain, France, Portugal, and (in earlier times) England, Scotland, Sweden, and Poland. If all the people have a share in power, then the State is popular, like in Switzerland, the Grisons, and some free cities of Germany. If only the smallest portion of the people hold power (as in Venice, where it's held by the nobles, and in Genoa, by the twenty-eight families), it is called a Signoria, and the State is Aristocratic, as it was with the Romans, the Athenians, and many other republics that flourished most when they incorporated elements of both popular and aristocratic governance. Although time's injuries and the malice of people may strain the form of any of these governments against its own nature, its essence does not change even if it acquires a different quality.^[10]

He praises historical examples like the Roman Republic, which successfully blended these elements to achieve remarkable governance. "Republics that integrate the virtues of multiple systems of government," Medrano affirms, "achieve a balance that guards against the excesses of any single form." For Medrano, power must always be tempered with virtue. He advocates for a governance structure that unites the authority of monarchy, the wisdom of aristocracy, and the equity of timocracy, ensuring that justice, stability, and prosperity endure.

At the core of his doctrinal framework lies a divine precept: just as God's singularity is absolute, so too must governance uphold unity, justice, and moral accountability. Medrano asserts, true leadership requires a reflection of divine virtues. Authority must not be wielded arbitrarily but must align with God's justice, shaping a government that is not only permissible but enduring. He writes:

As one ancient writer said, a prince should serve the same God, observe the same law, and fear the same death as his subjects. For in the end, all things of this world pass away, consumed by the flow of time, and when they reach their peak, their greatness and state come to an end. The Creator has set this law, so that men do not become arrogant, believing their kingdoms to be eternal, and thus realize that they are made of matter subject to celestial and incorruptible causes.^[54]

The first chapter of República Mista, which begins on page 17, establishes religion as the cornerstone of governance and societal harmony:

To begin at the true beginning, with the origin and end of all things, God, I will illustrate the importance for Princes to recognize this Supreme Majesty. In obedience and reverence, they must recognize that they, too, are His creatures, subject to His laws and divine will, just like everyone else. For the example of faith that they set becomes a law and a model for their subjects, fostering a society rooted in love and charity. This is the surest path to preserving, expanding, and fortifying the realms and borders of their kingdoms and empires.^[10]

In the religion chapter of Republica Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano illustrates that religion is the essential foundation of all civil governance. He draws from natural philosophy to show that everything, from celestial bodies to human societies, follows a divine order, stating: "This entire lower world obeys the higher, governed by it as a secondary cause."^[4] Medrano confirms that even the most isolated or undeveloped societies possess "some specific order, arrangement, and agreement... and some awareness of the divine,"^[4] noting that no people exist without customs, laws, or spiritual practices. He sees this universal inclination toward religion as evidence of its necessity in human affairs. Citing Plutarch, he writes: "A city might sooner do without the sun... than without some establishment of law or belief that God exists and upholds creation."^[55] He connects divine justice and human governance as inseparable, arguing that "one cannot exist among men without the other."

For Medrano, religion precedes and enables laws, obedience, justice, and the cohesion of republics. He praises ancient lawmakers Lycurgus, Numa Pompilius, Solon, and others for instilling reverence for the divine, noting that fear and hope in their religions secured social order and civic duty.

He quotes Aristotle in asserting that religion is natural to mankind and vital to leadership: "It is necessary that the prince... be esteemed as religious... for subjects more easily endure hardship when they believe rulers have the gods on their side." Medrano surveys religious practices across cultures, from Egyptian sacrifices to Phoenician sky worship, to show that "all are moved by religion," quoting Cicero: "They believe that they must diligently worship and uphold the ancestral gods." He also recounts Roman reverence for the divine, quoting Cicero and Virgil to highlight how "piety preserved the republic." In contrast, Medrano laments that when the Athenians, under the influence of skeptics like Protagoras and Diagoras, "began to show contempt for God and His ministers," their republic declined. The rise and fall of states correlate directly with the respect shown to religion and its institutions, warning: "No fault is greater than that of one who does not know God."^[1]

In Republica Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano codifies that the prosperity (medrar) and stability of monarchies are deeply tied to fidelity to their faith and their reverence for religious authority. He credits the expansion of the Spanish monarchy to the devoutness of its rulers, writing that since they "began to enjoy the special protection of the Holy Apostolic see," they have prospered by "persecuting the enemies of our holy faith." He recounts the story of King Alfonso the Chaste, whose devotion led to divine miracles, such as the appearance of angels crafting a jeweled cross, which affirmed Spain's sanctified imperial mission. In contrast, Medrano attributes the decline of France and England to their betrayal of religious fidelity: "By scorning the Apostolic See, the supreme pontiffs, and the Catholic faith," the English monarchy brought ruin not only to itself but also to Scotland and other allied nations.

He describes the sacredness of religious spaces, citing Theodosius and Valentinian's decree that "those who forcibly remove anyone seeking refuge in the church should be punished with death," affirming that "one should be safer under the protection of religion than under arms."

Throughout, Medrano affirms that true political order rests on respect for divine law, warning against rulers who disguise ambition with false sanctity. "Nothing is more deceptively attractive than false religion," he quotes Livy, "where the divine power of the gods is pretended to cover wickedness." He condemns the use of religion to justify factionalism and civil war, invoking the chaos caused by false prophets and reformers across Europe.

Medrano used historical examples like Numa Pompilius, who instilled fear of God into a warlike people, showing that:

if such a religious prince had not succeeded Romulus, the Roman people would have become uncontrollable and violent.

A prince, he insists, must be:

truthful and perceived as truthful, since no power gained by crime is enduring.

He instructs that rulers may need to practice discretion in politics, but always within bounds: "Nothing must be done against faith, charity, humanity, or religion." According to Medrano, the prince's word, once given, should be as unbreakable as divine law:

His word should be as true, certain, constant, and reliable as the word of God.^[52]

Medrano warns that "God despises those who are false and deceitful," and sees the rise of corrupt rulers as divine punishment: "The Holy Spirit will make a hypocrite ruler as punishment for the sins of the people."^[4] Ultimately, he teaches that religion is not merely personal but foundational to legitimate rule, and any governance that opposes it is destined to fail.^[7]

In his Republica Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano, Secretary of State and War to Charles Emmanuel I, Duke of Savoy, recounts a powerful oration delivered by the Duke to the people of Thonon and surrounding territories, urging their return to the Catholic faith.

The Duke appeals to religious tradition and loyalty, asking:

"If the lord has the authority to command his vassals, and the vassals are obliged to obey the lord in matters not against God, how much more so in matters that serve Him, glorify Him, and are for your own good and well-being?"^[4]

The 11th Duke of Savoy reminds them of their six-hundred-year history under Catholic rule and laments their departure into heresy, "living as heretics, though they claim the name of Christians." Appealing to history, doctrine, and royal duty, he urged his subjects to reject false religions and remain loyal to the Church of Rome, warning that religious division undermines both faith and sovereignty. He invoked ancestral loyalty, the sanctity of the sacraments, and the divine role of Catholic monarchs to defend one God and civil peace:

"There is only one faith, one universal Church, one head, and one shepherd over all Christendom, which is the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Saint Peter. There is one true religion, just as there is only one true God; all else is ruin."^[10]

The Duke of Savoy instructed his subjects to turn their eyes "to God and His holy religion, which your ancestors, grandparents, and most of your parents embraced; the same faith that your natural princes and lords have always held without stain, wavering, sin, or disgrace as they never departed from it."

He questioned how he could enter the church or approach the altar of the Lord if he is allied with His enemies:

"Could it be that you, born in my Catholic states, of such ancient and Catholic lineage, would choose to be barred by sacred and civil laws from witnessing, making a will, inheriting, or holding any public office? Will you allow emperors (and I, too, call you) to label you enemies of the truth and allies of death, for your deeds are against it, filled with disgrace and sorcery, covered in illusions by which you fabricate lies, wage war against the innocent, and rob the faithful of light?"^[7]

He questions why his subjects continue to ignore how their ministers, under a cloak of false piety, pollute everything, "leaving wounds in the consciences of the innocent, obscuring the light of the sun for those who are captivated by novelty?" He asks his subjects to pity themselves, their souls, those of their children and descendants. He asks his subjects to remember the peace and rest they once enjoyed, and recognize that they must follow and hold to the religion taught to them by the Prince of the Apostles and by the other vicars of Christ.

The Duke of Savoy concludes by stating that if their beliefs were born of genuine zeal, and not of malice and manifest error, as has been condemned by General Councils, they would not view their Catholic kings and princes, and their own lords in particular, as ignorant of salvation:

"Your wickedness is evident. My intentions are clear and good. My profession and religion, which is Catholic, are true and certain. Whoever wishes to follow it and have me as his lord and not his enemy must now demonstrate his devotion publicly, embracing God and His Church, for I wish to have no part with those who do not belong to her."^[7]

With this declaration, the 11th Duke of Savoy aligned his rule with divine order, asserting that those who abandon the Catholic faith ally themselves with disorder, sedition, and spiritual death. His words sparked widespread repentance, restoring allegiance among towns, nobles, and clerics across the region.^[4] The oration denounces sectarianism and warns of the civil disorder it causes, citing examples such as Münster, La Rochelle, and Geneva, which became "fortresses of the devil" within Christendom.^[11]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano, personally witnessing the Duke's oration, affirms its transformative power:

This had such an impact on the minds of everyone that all begged for mercy.^[11]

He praises the Duke's personal piety, military rituals, and protection of religious institutions, presenting him as a Catholic ruler who embodies Cicero's maxim: "In every republic, the first care is for divine matters."^[10]

In República Mista, the Duke's oration stands as an enactment of doctrine. It illustrates the Medrano precept that true sovereignty cannot exist without unity of faith, and that civil disorder always follows spiritual rebellion. The ruler, therefore, must act as a defender of the church (defensor fidei). The Duke's oration is a historic example of how protecting his subjects from heresy brought them back to God, and that to govern rightly is to do so under the authority of divine order over secular neutrality.^[1]

In República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano presents the defense of Catholic religion not only as a spiritual necessity, but as a cornerstone of stability in the republic. Among the most serious threats to the health of a republic, he confirms, are not only external wars but internal seditions that disguise themselves in the form of religious zeal. When princes fail to uphold the true faith with vigilance and reverence, they leave space for sectarian movements to arise. These movements frequently shelter individuals who are fugitives from justice, political opportunists, or enemies of lawful order.

Citing Aristotle's Politics, Medrano writes:

"Fear breeds seditions, for as many commit crimes to avoid punishment as do so to strike first before others strike them." (Et metus seditiones movent, tam enim qui fecerunt iniurias metuentes poenam, quam ii qui infens expectant, praevenire volentes, priusquam ea inferatur.)^[11]

According to Medrano, many such factions form under a pretense of persecution. They use religious justification to mask personal ambition or resentment. These groups often organize around a single charismatic leader, frequently one of humble or illegitimate origin. United in defiance of lawful authority, they seize towns or fortresses and proclaim rival republics built upon rebellion.

He identifies the Anabaptist seizure of Münster as a prime example, describing the great effort undertaken by Emperor Charles V and the ecclesiastical princes to suppress what he regarded as a heretical regime. He adds the examples of La Rochelle and Montauban in France, which fell under the control of the Huguenots, and Geneva under the Calvinists. He considers all of these cities to be fortresses of error, where rebellion and disorder persisted against rightful monarchy.

Medrano warns that wherever the Catholic religion is not upheld with strength and reverence, destructive doctrines will take root. A prince who neglects the true faith cannot expect to retain real authority, as sectarian factions will eventually challenge his sovereignty and limit his power.

A prince can be certain that if the Catholic religion is not protected and cherished as it should be in his dominion, it will be all too easy for another to take its place. And once another religion has taken hold, he cannot freely call himself lord of that province, for he will remain dependent on it all his life.^[11]

From such disorder follows licentiousness, impiety, and division. These forces gradually undermine the body politic. For Medrano, no republic can endure without religion, and no military power can remain strong if the soul of the nation is weak. Religion and law must remain united if political order is to be sustained:

If an empire lacks a strong religion, it is impossible for it to be powerful in arms. Without these two things, it must fall. But if they remain united, as they do in this Monarchy, then it will live and stand for a thousand ages.^[11]

This duty of preserving religious and political unity belongs above all to the sovereign.

"Who does this duty belong to more than the prince? It is fitting that what is best be honored by the best, and that what rules be served by the ruler." (Ad quem autem ea potius quam ad Principem pertinet? Decet enim quod optimum est, ab optimo coli, quod imperat, ab imperante.)^[11]

Medrano concludes by affirming the enduring legitimacy of the Catholic faith. He contrasts its divine origin and spiritual fruitfulness with the false religions of apostates and pagans, which endure only through ignorance or rebellion:

If the false religions of apostates and pagans could sustain themselves for so long, and still persist in some places as good religions in the eyes of the ignorant and the blind, what hope can we not place in our true religion? It pleases and delights our God, from whom it originates, and to whom we owe our being, preservation, and the abundance of goods He so generously provides to both the good and the bad.^[11]

In Republica Mista, dedicated to the 1st Duke of Lerma, Tomás Fernández de Medrano, contrasts genuine religious devotion with the dangers of superstition and false belief. He praises figures like Francisco de Sandoval, Duke of Lerma, who, despite his immense power, invested in sacred architecture and remained mindful of mortality.

Medrano also highlights the zeal of Charles Emmanuel I of Savoy, who instructed him to prioritize any matter that served both God and the king. Their unity, Medrano confirms, exemplify the ideal union of power and piety. When advised to act militarily against foreign alliances, Savoy replied that Spain's strength lay in having "a very Catholic king, a true friend of God," whose faith alone could secure divine protection.

He uses historical examples, from the Hebrews who defied Emperor Caligula, to Christian martyrs, and even pagan figures like Calanus the Indian philosopher, to show the enduring strength of belief. Even misguided religions, he insists, have inspired profound sacrifice: "Nothing rules the masses more effectively than superstition," he quotes Quintus Curtius, warning that uneducated people are particularly vulnerable to false wonders and omens.

For Medrano, true religion must be distinguished from superstition and astrology, which he condemns as deceitful distractions. Superstition, he says, is "empty appearance and false imagination," and leads people away from divine truth. He denounces judicial astrologers for misleading the public, undermining reason and faith alike. Citing Pico della Mirandola, Aquinas, and Varro, he warns that only through proper reverence and obedience to divine law can virtue, faith, and courage be sustained.^[4]

The concept of Patria (love and duty to one's Fatherland) is not an abstract idea by Tomás Fernández de Medrano in his República Mista, rather it was lived by Spain and his ancestors as doctrine. The town of Medrano, La Rioja, derives not only its name but its arms from the noble House of Medrano. The heraldic motto: "To die for Faith, King, and Patria is glorious," reflects the enduring legacy of the doctrine upheld in Spain, embedded in the municipality's civic identity since its first recorded donation in 1044.^[57]

In the Religion chapter of República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano codifies Patria (love and service to one's homeland) as a sacred duty, rooted in natural affection, divine law, and moral conscience.^[11]

Drawing on ancient and biblical examples, he declares that:

Every person is obligated to serve and aid the public good... for within its welfare lie the life, honor, and prosperity of each individual.^[58]

Medrano recounts the story of Nehemiah, who was moved to tears upon hearing of Jerusalem's desolation and was granted royal support to rebuild his city. He cites Cicero, who said: "All affections are encompassed in our homeland, for which any noble person would seek death if it would be beneficial."

Examples such as Cato the Younger, who resisted unjust laws and rejected political alliances that compromised the Republic, show that true loyalty lies in justice and conscience: "Our conscience and the immortal gods are given to us, and they cannot be separated from us."

The chapter continues with patriotic acts across history: El Cid, despite exile, served Castile with valor; Juan Mendez of Évora opposed unjust taxation and was later vindicated by the king; and Lycurgus bound Sparta to his laws even after death. Medrano also recalls Codrus, who gave his life to ensure Athens' survival, asserting that "to die for virtue is no death at all."

He praises Spain's Catholic monarchs for defending the faith, founding churches, and extending the Gospel to distant lands. In particular, he honors Philip III for upholding the Inquisition as a "mighty shield and sacred institution." Medrano concludes that the strength of a kingdom depends on its moral and spiritual foundations, quoting Seneca: "Where there is no regard for law, holiness, piety, and faith, the kingdom is unstable."

Ultimately, he codifies good governance with religious precepts, instructing rulers to embody truth and virtue to earn the people's trust and God's favor, as only He bestows and withdraws power: "The Lord changes the times and seasons; He raises and deposes kings," quoting Daniel 4.^[4]

Before the second chapter of República Mista, Medrano begins with an introduction on obedience, and a meditation on the necessity of obedience for both spiritual life and civil harmony. Medrano opens by quoting Seneca: "Our minds, like noble and generous horses, are better governed with a light rein." He asserts that if even the ancient Persians taught their children to "love, obey, and revere their princes and magistrates," then Christians should not neglect what even pagans held as sacred.

He teaches that the strength of the Roman Republic rested on this precept, and that Christians, called to serve and revere God, must likewise obey their earthly rulers. Obedience to Kings, Councils, and Magistrates, he writes, flows naturally from the teachings of the fourth commandment and should be instilled from the earliest age. Medrano affirms this doctrine is deeply rooted in tradition and that it serves both as a reminder to the wise and a guide to the unknowing. He closes the introduction with a pointed reflection:

To give counsel to a fool is an act of charity; to give it to the wise, one of honor; but to offer it in times of depravity, an act of wisdom.

The second chapter of República Mista, which begins on page 69, codifies the importance of obedience to princes and magistrates as a safeguard against disorder and rebellion. Medrano states:

If knowing how to govern well is the most effective preventative against corruption, then knowing how to obey well which is crucial among the people, is of even greater importance. Where obedience is lacking, order is lost, and disorder takes its place. The most important and advantageous quality that has been preserved in these kingdoms is the high regard we have always held for councils, magistrates, ministers, judges, and public officials, recognizing them as men placed there by the hand of God. For this reason, we honor and respect them as representatives of divine rule over all creatures. Just as the Almighty in His glory has created an order among beings (setting some to serve and others to govern) and placed certain stars in the heavens to shine more brightly than others, as a symbol of His divinity, with the Sun itself illuminating, warming, and nurturing all things on earth for humanity's use, so too He wished that the supreme councils and magistrates in cities, provinces, and kingdoms would shine by virtue of their excellence.^[59]

Quoting Erasmus, Medrano affirms: "To command and to obey are two things that keep sedition away from citizens and ensure concord." He compares a well-ordered kingdom to a body where the ruler is the head and the law its soul, insisting that "where obedience is lacking, order is lost, and disorder takes its place."

Medrano recounts that Sparta's success was not due to the wisdom of its rulers, but because "the citizens knew how to obey." He declares that Spanish unity and prosperity result from a careful balance of powers, ensuring that neither nobility or commoners dominate, sustained by reverence for public officials as "men placed there by the hand of God."

He declares that kings must be honored as God's representatives, with respect extended also to their ministers and councils. "This authority," he writes, "is the true source of their greatness," achieved by honoring the king and the realm.

Drawing heavily on sacred Scripture, Medrano cites Romans 13, Titus 3, and 1 Peter 2, reinforcing that "there is no power but from God," and that resisting rulers is resisting divine order. Subjects must obey not out of fear alone, but "for conscience' sake." As Tacitus writes, "There can be no peace without arms, no arms without pay, and no pay without taxes." He adds, "Render tribute to whom tribute is due... honor to whom honor."

Medrano also reflects on the burdens of rulership, writing: "While we sleep, they remain vigilant... they carry the weight of countless souls under their dominion." He quotes Seleucus: "If one truly knew the weight of a scepter, they would not have the courage to pick it up."

He condemns slandering magistrates, stating that "no one should judge the actions of Councillors... but the Prince himself," and praises emperors like Augustus and Vespasian for the honors they showed to senators. Vespasian declared: "I can respond to the injuries they commit, but [subjects] are not allowed to speak ill of them." He asserts that obedience, respect, and prayer for rulers are not only civic duties but sacred obligations that sustain both peace and divine order.

Medrano expands the precept of obedience to include reverence for the ministers and servants of kings, particularly those close to court. He affirms the high dignity historically granted to officers such as the Reyes de Armas (Kings of Arms), describing their role as "a profession akin to the heroic," with privileges dating back to Bacchus, Alexander the Great, Augustus, and Charlemagne. These included safe passage, exemption from common duties, the authority to judge dishonor, and the honor of wearing royal insignia. Such prerogatives, he writes, show that even humble servants of the king "are invested with mysteries," and should be respected accordingly. Medrano observes:

In my view, both the counselor and the realm will be fortunate when such a servant and confidant possesses qualities worthy of the royal station they serve, especially when their innate nobility and virtues align with the dignity required for such a role. Where noble lineage and habit join with noble actions, there can be no doubt of their merit. And when this is accompanied by piety, goodness, and holiness—as we see, experience, and witness in our time—such virtue indeed stands as a model worthy of our admiration and emulation, does it not?^[10]

Medrano cautions private individuals against interfering in public governance, stating that reform must come through proper authority. "No public display should be made," he writes, advising that concerns be directed to lawful superiors. Those who carry out the will of the prince, he says, "are his hands," and as such, are owed honor and obedience.

Quoting Plautus, "What a king does should be considered honorable; it is the duty of subjects to obey," he defends rulers against misjudgment by the ignorant, stating that "what is done piously by the good is often judged as cruelty by the wicked." Empire, he writes, brings envy and misunderstanding, and "the reward... is to be maligned." Yet true rulers focus on justice and the common good, trusting that over time, their deeds will be recognized.

He contrasts the harsh Locrian law, where lawmakers faced execution for failed proposals, with Mecenas's advice to Augustus: "Praise and honor those who offer sound counsel... but neither disgrace nor accuse those who err." Moderation and prudence, Medrano insists, are essential in courtly matters.

He praises those counselors who temper princes' passions and offer discreet, virtuous guidance. "No wise and great prince has ever lacked a trusted confidant," he writes, naming Calisthenes, Panaetius, and others who brought wisdom and glory to their rulers. When such figures possess noble lineage, wisdom, and piety, they serve as "a model worthy of admiration and emulation." This understanding of obedience and royal council served as a justification for the valido in Habsburg Spain.^[48]

In República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano distinguishes between two types of authority: one supreme, answerable only to God, and the other subordinate and bound by law, exercised by magistrates for a limited time under royal commission. The supreme prince, he writes, "acknowledges none greater than himself (after God)," and magistrates derive their authority from him and remain subject to his laws.

Medrano affirms that individuals must obey these powers in all matters not contrary to divine or natural law, even when commands seem unjust: "They should not judge their judges." The supreme magistrate is likened to "a father to the kingdom," tasked with maintaining peace, justice, and the common good.

He warns, however, of the widespread aversion to tyrants and the ease with which rulers who lack visible virtue may fall into contempt. Yet Scripture teaches obedience even to corrupt rulers, as they act as "instruments of [God's] wrath, punishing the people's wickedness." He quotes, "When God is angered, the people receive such a ruler as they deserve for their sins."

Citing Tacitus and Augustine, Medrano illustrates how power can corrupt even the seemingly virtuous. Tiberius, Nero, and Galba are presented as cautionary examples, men who ruled poorly despite early promise. "Things feigned cannot last long," Augustine warns.

Flattery, more than open enemies, is seen as the chief corrupter of rulers. Those "who make it a habit to praise all things in their rulers, be they virtuous or vicious," erode truth and judgment. Tiberius lamented: "Oh, men prepared for servitude!" Medrano recounts how Caesar, influenced by a flatterer, "came to a miserable end."

He writes: "Flattery has overthrown more than the enemy," criticizing courtiers who, instead of offering honest counsel, enable a prince's whims to serve their own gain.

In República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano confirms that obedience and reverence are due to all rulers, whether just or unjust. "Let the good not be scandalized to see the wicked exalted," he writes, asserting that the rise and fall of kings is governed by divine providence. Drawing on Daniel 4, he declares: "The Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men... and sets over them the lowliest of men," emphasizing that even seemingly unworthy rulers are chosen by God for a purpose.

Medrano cites the example of Nebuchadnezzar, whom God rewarded with Egypt despite his tyranny, and King Amasis of Egypt, who overcame public contempt for his humble origins through strength and wisdom. From 1 Samuel 8 to Jeremiah 27, Medrano presents biblical arguments for unconditional obedience: "I have handed over all these lands to my servant Nebuchadnezzar... all nations will serve him." He instructs subjects to trust that God raises kings not only to reward the good but also to punish the wicked.

He praises the historical patience of Christians under pagan and heretical rulers such as Nero, Julian the Apostate, and Diocletian, using their peaceable endurance as an example. Even David refused to harm King Saul, affirming: "Who can lay a hand upon the Lord's anointed and be guiltless?" Medrano cites both religious and legal prohibitions against cursing rulers, warning that murmuring against authority invites divine judgment.

The duty of a good subject, he insists, is to remain "humble, gracious, obedient, and devout," without aspiring beyond their station. Those who suffer under harsh rule should interpret it as a correction from God: "I will give you a king in my anger" (Hosea), and endure it with prayer and patience, trusting that "He who wounds also heals."

Medrano explains that rulers hold Regalia, symbols of sovereign authority which entitle them to create and enforce laws over all subjects. These Regalia are expressed through eight primary points, which, when properly observed in practice, ensure public obedience and preserve the order and stability of the realm.^[52]

In República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano codifies eight Regalia that define sovereign power:

• To create and repeal laws
• To declare war or establish peace
• To act as the highest court of appeal
• To appoint and remove high officials
• To levy and collect taxes and public contributions
• To grant pardons and dispensations
• To set or alter currency and its value
• To require unconditional oaths of loyalty

He affirms that rulers may exercise these powers directly or through delegated ministers and must not be disrespected, even when their administration is imperfect. Their authority, Medrano states, is divinely instituted and must be regarded as sacred:

Established by God through countless decrees and testimonies, this authority ought to be respected and held as a source of majesty.^[52]

Subjects, he instructs, should not scheme against their superiors or question their actions. Public calamities, such as famine, plague, or war, should not be attributed to rulers without clear evidence. "One is not to be condemned if their thoughts are not laid bare," he quotes, warning against judging secret intentions or mistaking natural events for political failure.

Medrano reaffirms that discretion, obedience, and reverence are owed not only in action but in speech and silence. Drawing on the example of Otho, he writes: "Tam nescire quædam milites, quam facere oportet"–"It is as necessary for soldiers to be ignorant of certain things as it is for them to carry out their duties." Just as commanders do not divulge all plans to their soldiers, who face constant danger, private citizens, even less so, should seek to uncover the secret intentions of princes.

Echoing Seneca's wisdom, "Qui plus scire velle quam satis sit; intemperantiæ genus est" ("To wish to know more than is sufficient is a kind of excess"), Medrano confirms that excessive curiosity disrupts peace and loyalty. Silence and obedience are therefore "powerful means of attaining peace," reminding subjects that this world is not their final home, therefore:

The loyalty and silence of subjects toward their king and rightful lord, and toward his councils and magistrates, are crucial virtues within the populace and powerful means of attaining some peace in this life. This peace reminds us that it is not our permanent home nor our final destination and is best suited to remind us that we live and journey toward an eternal life, not this fleeting, mortal, and transitory one.^[60]

In República Mista, Medrano contemplates the mortality of even the greatest monarchies, emphasizing the need for prayer and moral vigilance. Within this reflection, he elevates Philip III of Spain as a living embodiment of Christian kingship, whose reign aligns with divine order and the spiritual duties of sovereign rule.

Medrano presents Philip as a king whose holiness is evident in his adherence to divine law and his appointment of virtuous and devout magistrates. His valor, though not expressed through personal combat, is manifest in his strategic leadership, having assembled a powerful fleet and army that defended the realm without bloodshed. His magnanimity is marked by clemency toward those he might have punished, fulfilling the counsel of Saint Isidore, who taught that just rulers must know when to defer judgment in favor of mercy.

Justice, too, defines his reign, as Philip personally traversed his dominions to hear and resolve the grievances of his subjects. His prudence is demonstrated by a voluntary retreat from the distractions of the hunt and the pursuit of military glory, choosing instead a path of stable and attentive governance. Finally, Medrano praises the king's compassion, particularly in his refusal to wage war against the French despite political opportunity, an act inspired by the counsel of Pope Clement VIII and rooted in the conviction that power must never corrupt the gentle spirit.

Through this portrait, Medrano casts Philip III not merely as a political figure, but as an exemplar of sacred monarchy, whose virtues affirm the doctrinal and moral precepts articulated throughout the first volume of the República Mista.

Tacitus' wisdom, "Semper alicui potentium invisus, non culpa, sed ut flagitiorum impatiens" ("He who is hated by the powerful is not guilty, but impatient of their crimes"), guides Medrano's counsel: those who cannot tolerate injustice may find themselves resented at court and should avoid its intrigues for a more peaceful life. "It is very dangerous to skin a lion."

He lauds princes who, like Alexander the Great, refused to punish those who insulted them, choosing to live virtuously and correct falsehood with example. "Posterity, and a glorious remembrance of oneself, well deserved," Tacitus wrote, Medrano holds this as the supreme goal of princely rule.

He cites Emperor Theodosius, who refused to punish those who insulted the government, urging compassion even toward malice, and commanding that no judge act unless ordered by the emperor himself. As Lipsius warned, "Not all rulers are Alexanders." Yet the best defense against criticism is to give the people no reason to murmur. "The one who disregards fame clearly values virtue lightly."

He quotes Solomon: "Nomen impiorum putrescet (The name of the wicked will rot.)" Writers may not harm rulers in life, but they tarnish them in memory. Medrano concludes with Tacitus:

False honor helps, and false infamy terrifies. Believe us to be just as our reputation is.

Ultimately, Medrano codifies theological and philosophical precepts to provide a doctrine grounded in obedience that is divinely ordained, as the law itself flows from the unity of God.^[10]

The third chapter of República Mista, which begins on page 111, titled On the Third Point of the Roman Ambassador, codifies the fundamental role of justice in sustaining a republic. Medrano opens with Erasmus' maxim, "Respublica, duabus rebus continetur praemio, poena"–"A republic is held together by two things: reward and punishment." Medrano begins his third chapter as follow:

I shall treat here of that element, rule, commandment, law, and particular custom, that enabled the Romans to govern their republic effectively for so long. I align myself with justice, for it seems to me that justice is the force at the heart of this accomplishment.^[10]

Medrano praises justice as the queen of virtues, referencing Cicero:

Justice is the mistress and queen of virtues, the foundation of enduring honor and fame, without which nothing can be praiseworthy.^[61]

Justice, Medrano affirms, is both divine and societal: the "bond of human society" and the precept that distinguishes good from evil. Without it, confusion and vice prevail: "To reward evil in place of good, to oppress the good without punishing the wicked, this is to confuse vice with virtue." Justice, he writes, reveals "the distinction between the good and the bad," serving as both divine law and the "bond of human society."

Drawing on classical authorities, he defines justice as inseparable from wisdom. Plato teaches that no state can endure without justice and divine counsel. Aristotle calls it a "general virtue," containing all others, and Solomon asks God for wisdom alone, recognizing that "there can be no justice without prudence." Medrano calls prudence "a firm pillar, strong foundation, and sure guide of all a prince's enterprises."

Justice requires temperance, courage, and charity. A just ruler must resist ambition and passion, and defend the oppressed even at personal cost. "Justice instills strength and courage," allowing the ruler to approach "the divine nature." Medrano insists that faith depends on justice, warning that without it, power is reduced to mere force. He condemns those political theorists who advocate: "Neglect all that is right and good so long as it may grow their power."

Medrano draws on Cicero again to define justice as "the constant and perpetual will to give each their due." It is the duty of princes, magistrates, and counselors to uphold this precept impartially. Diogenes called justice the source of "peace and perpetual happiness," while Hesiod described it as a "chaste, venerable virgin," and Pindar as "the queen of the world." Pythagoras, more enigmatically, wrote: "The balance never tips."

For Medrano, justice must transcend kinship, wealth, or personal benefit. Citing Plato, he writes:

Justice requires that we set aside personal pleasures and private benefits to embrace the public good, even to our detriment.^[52]

He writes that wherever doubt enters judgment, injustice is near, for true equity, by nature, is "clear and resplendent."

Medrano follows classical philosophers in dividing justice into two principal forms:

• Distributive justice: Distributive justice consists in "granting each their due, honor, dignity, or punishment," particularly relevant to governance.
• Commutative justice: Commutative justice, by contrast, regulates fair dealings between individuals, grounded in the maxim: "Do not do unto others what you would not wish done unto you" (Quod tibi non vis, alteri ne feceris).

Medrano differentiates between distributive and commutative justice, the former concerning the allocation of honor or punishment, and the latter governing fairness in contracts and exchanges. Justice is portrayed as the "mother of virtues," nourishing temperance, moderation, courage, and wisdom. He calls attention to scriptural commands for justice, such as Jeremiah's exhortation: "Render justice and righteousness; deliver the oppressed from the hand of the oppressor." Without justice, neither household nor republic can endure. "If in it there are no rewards for right deeds nor punishments for wrongs," he warns, "then divine order itself is absent."

Justice, he confirms, exists to preserve human society. It is "guardian of the laws, defender of the good, mortal enemy of the wicked," and so essential to civilization that even criminals must rely on it in part. Medrano quotes Cicero: "Even pirates and highway robbers could not exist without some part of it."

Drawing on Pythagorean thought, Medrano states that justice should be "regarded as the mother from whose breast all other virtues are nourished," as no one could be temperate, moderate, courageous, or wise without it.

He presents justice as a reflection of divine providence: "governing the world and ruling over all things." Its influence extends to every domain, he writes:

In cities, justice is equity and peace; in households, it is the harmony between husband and wife; between masters and servants, it is goodwill; in the body, it is health and the perfection of each part.^[1]

For Medrano, justice is not only foundational to republics, but to all relationships, virtues, and divine order.

Tomás Fernández de Medrano explores justice as the sustaining force of a republic, the precept that binds society together through reward and punishment. Drawing from classical authorities, Plato, Aristotle, Isidore, Solomon, Medrano presents justice as inseparable from wisdom and prudence, without which no kingdom or republic can be stable. "There can be no justice without prudence," he echoes, underscoring that wise governance begins with self-governance.

He emphasizes temperance and courage as supports to justice, stating it helps moderate passions such as ambition, anger, and avarice. Medrano ties justice to faith itself, warning that if not upheld, "faith would lose its legitimacy," and power would become a prize for the most unscrupulous. He denounces power-centric political theories: "They neglect all that is right and good so long as it may grow their power."

Quoting Cicero again, he defines justice as: "Iustitia est constans, perpetua voluntas ius suum unicuique tribuens"–"Justice is the constant and perpetual will to give each their due." True princes, he writes, are those who do good to all under their care and harm no one.

The ancients' reverence for justice is showcased in stories of Egyptian judges depicted blindfolded and handless, symbols of impartiality, and of Trajan, who told a governor, "Use this sword for me if I rule justly, and against me if I do not." Medrano rebukes skepticism toward Spanish heritage and traditions, such as the legacy of Apostle James or the deeds of El Cid, as impious and divisive.

Justice, he writes, must be free of personal bias, and magistrates must resist favoritism or vengeance. Examples from antiquity, Aristides the Just, Pope Sixtus V, and Emperor Hadrian represent rulers who prioritized truth over grudge, and mercy over retribution.

He praises princes who rise above resentment, noting, "To refrain from doing good when able is to surrender one's virtue." Anger, he says, destroys sound judgment: "Where there is anger, nothing is done rightly."

Historical exemplars, Scipio Africanus, Philip of Macedonia, Vespasian, and Alexander Severus are cited for their dedication to fair judgment, humility, and even humor in justice. Medrano illustrates how these figures used their authority to defend integrity, rather than inflate it.

He references a lesson from Sparta: "The republic thrived under laws and magistrates who upheld them." True greatness, Medrano asserts, lies not in titles but in virtue, and justice remains the defining mark of legitimate rule.

Medrano expounds upon the inseparable relationship between justice, noble virtue, and the preservation of republics. Law, he teaches, is the very "rule of justice," and justice its purpose. Without it, states decay: "The law is the soul of the republic, the blood that gives it life, and the rule that sustains the state." A republic nears ruin when "those condemned by law are pardoned, and judgments are reversed."

Medrano provides historical examples, from the downfall of Philip of Macedonia and the exile of Demetrius, to the deposition of the Swedish king Henry, as evidence that denial of justice breeds discord, abandonment, and collapse. In contrast, acts of humility and fairness, such as King Philip III requesting permission from a baker to pass through his home, exemplify the sanctity of justice and sacred kingship.

He warns that appointing unworthy individuals, particularly through the sale of offices, invites divine wrath and civil decline. "The fault lies with rulers who... place corrupt judges over the faithful," he writes, echoing the Sorbonne's admonition to King Francis II, denouncing the sale of ecclesiastical and secular offices as a betrayal of virtue and a root of religious schism.

Quoting both Titelman and a celebrated philosopher, Medrano laments that in his day, nobility is prized above merit:

Even the ignorant and the depraved [are considered] suitable for every office, whether civil or ecclesiastical... a misfortune within the Holy Church... that no amount of tears could rightly mourn.^[62]

Medrano defends true nobility as rooted in virtue, not lineage alone: to honor the corrupt sons of noble fathers is to shame the ancestors themselves. He invokes the words of Mattathias: "Be zealous for the law and give your lives for the testament of your fathers," reminding nobles of their duty to emulate their forebears:

If there is anything good in nobility, it is that it places a certain necessity upon nobles to imitate their predecessors.^[52]

For Medrano, it is essential that princes honor virtue in both nobility and commoners, appointing those with merit, not wealth or flattery. To do otherwise, he warns, is to provoke the wrath of the loyal and suffer "great losses in matters of importance." He praises contemporary Spain as a model, where "distinguished and grave personages... occupy the offices" and uphold the republic through virtue and example.

Quoting the Partidas, he writes: "To know how to use nobility is a clear union of virtues... kings should greatly honor [knights and nobles], as those with whom they are to accomplish their work."

Rejecting favoritism and courtly corruption, Medrano offers examples of just rulers such as Trajan, Augustus, Pope Sixtus V, and Philip III, who all practiced restraint, impartiality, and forgiveness. He condemns nepotism, flattery, and the elevation of the unworthy, urging princes to recognize merit and safeguard justice as the foundation of their rule. "The reputation of the lord," he reminds, "grows from the nobility of those who serve him."^[50]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano turns his attention to the relationship between nobility, virtue, and justice. He declares that noble birth alone does not warrant honor; rather:

He who acts contrary to his lineage... ought not to be honored and favored by the Prince simply because he was born of good lineage, but instead punished for having dishonored it.^[10]

Those who live without virtue stain their ancestral name and should be overlooked in favor of humble but valiant individuals who strive to emulate noble ideals through personal merit.

Medrano invokes the examples of Hannibal, who declared that any soldier who proved himself would be counted as Carthaginian, and the Duke of Savoy, who often rewarded poor soldiers over aristocrats. As Medrano notes, "He who serves should be rewarded, and he who has served the most should be rewarded the most." The value of personal deeds, he insists, outweighs inherited glories: "Just as one's present sins may be compounded by those of the past... so too can one's deeds accumulate honor or disgrace."

While acknowledging that princes may, in some cases, elevate individuals without visible merit, Medrano stresses that such appointments should be guided by divine providence:

What we perceive as favoritism... may actually be the means by which God's will is achieved.^[10]

He instructs rulers to be mindful of the traditions, integrity, and capabilities of noble houses, citing Pope Gregory XIII's secret efforts to sustain Rome's ancient families and Augustus Caesar's financial support for the heir of Hortensius as examples of preserving honor through benevolence.

Medrano also warns against awarding honors as political favors or selling public offices. Such practices led to the downfall of states like Sparta and contributed to France's instability under Henry III. Instead, he advocates for a "symmetry" within the republic, a just distribution of responsibilities and honors according to proportion and merit. Quoting Ecclesiastes, he issues a grave warning: "A kingdom is transferred from one people to another due to injustice, injuries, offenses, and deceitful dealings."

In the closing passages of República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano reflects on the delicate balance between clemency and justice in governance. While he affirms that "gentleness and clemency are virtues worthy of a noble and magnanimous spirit," he cautions that these virtues must not be exercised to the detriment of the republic. "That state of the republic is most desirable and stable," he quotes Polybius, "in which, privately, all live uprightly and harmlessly, and publicly, justice and clemency prevail."

Medrano teaches rulers why they must inspire both love and fear, "love among the people, fear among enemies" and govern with dignity tempered by accessibility. He draws on Isocrates, who advised severity in investigations and mercy in sentencing, and emphasizes the importance of example: "We need more example than command."

The ruler's conduct, he asserts, shapes the soul of the republic. Kings and magistrates should imitate God's goodness, for:

Kings easily either uplift or undermine the lives of their subjects by their example; therefore, it does not befit a prince to commit sins, lest he create a model of sin.^[52]

Public virtue, Medrano insists, is more instructive than law alone: "Devotion to the prince and the desire to emulate him are more powerful than any punishment prescribed by law."

He instructs that rulers should be models of temperance and morality, resisting the urge to impose reforms through decrees alone. "If the king desires what is honorable, everyone will desire the same," he writes, noting that Constantine converted many through example, just as Henry VIII led England into schism through his conduct.

Medrano warns that the vices of rulers are more harmful than those of private citizens, as they "infuse them into the state, and they harm more by example than by their actual sins." He praises rulers who restrain their excesses, citing Diogenes, Augustus, and Pope Sixtus V as models of self-restraint and moral discipline.

Medrano offers a reflection on the endurance of empire, asserting that if rulers consistently matched the virtue and vigilance of their founders, particularly in "the expansion and preservation of the Catholic faith", and if subjects maintained their "obedience and reverence," the monarchy would continue to prosper (medrar). He credits Spain's strength in the 17th century to the effective administration of justice and flourishing military discipline, ex cuius sinu omnes triumphi manarunt ("from whose bosom all triumphs have flowed").

He adds that "there is no doubt" the monarchy may be preserved and strengthened "to the end of time," provided it does not stray from these founding precepts. Medrano concludes with a meditation on historical decline. Empires, no matter how well-ordered, will decay without fidelity to founding precepts:

The discipline of our ancestors sustains the republic, which, if it dissolves... we will also lose the empire.^[52]

Justice, labor, and virtue must be rewarded; deceit, sloth, and corruption must be punished. He quotes Cicero: "True justice and honest labor are adorned with honors... while the vices and deceits of men are punished with losses, shame, chains, scourges, exile, and death."

Medrano completes his first treatise with a quote on justice:

The truth of justice indeed requires that the wicked receive evil, and the good receive good.^[52]

In 1601, Tomás authorized his son, Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval, to initiate the process of presenting the first volume of the República Mista to the Royal Council and Philip III of Spain for official publication in Madrid. República Mista was printed on the royal press and published in Madrid by Juan Flamenco in 1602 by royal decree.^[63]

In Valladolid on 30 August 1601, República Mista was approved by Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas, the historian, writer and Chief Chronicler of Castile and the Americas during the reigns of Philip II and Philip III:

By order of Your Excellency, I have reviewed the book titled On the Three Precepts that the Ambassador of the Romans Gave to King Ptolemy Regarding the Good Governance of His Republic, brought to light by Don Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval of the Lords of Valdeosera. It seems to me that the subject matter is very useful and beneficial, full of good teachings, examples, and history. Your Excellency, if served by it, may grant the requested license for its printing.^[63]

Medrano's son, Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval, presented his father's treatise to the Royal Council of Castile alongside the original manuscript for verification and pricing. Recognizing its significance, King Philip III of Spain issued a royal decree authorizing its publication.^[63] In Valladolid, on 25 September 1601, the king and royal council granted him the license and faculty to print his father's treatise, throughout all the Kingdoms of Castile, commanding the Council and all justices to observe and execute this decree.^[63]

In Valladolid, the treatise received permission for sale on 5 March 1602, granted by Juan Gallo de Andrada, Secretary of the Chamber of His Majesty:

I, Juan Gallo de Andrada, Secretary of the Chamber of His Majesty and member of His Council, certify that... The First Part of the Mixed Republic... was priced at three maravedis per sheet... with twenty-one sheets, the total price was set at sixty-three maravedis... to be sold in paper... this pricing be placed at the beginning of the book and... cannot be sold without it... Valladolid, on the fifth of March, 1602.^[63]

República Mista has received sustained scholarly interest, from its favorable reception under Philip III to modern analysis, with Miguel Herrero García expanding on the king's summary through a detailed examination of the work's structure and classical foundations:

The author presents all political doctrine within a fictional narrative reminiscent of the old Spanish literature with Arabic influences. In this invention, the King Ptolemy of Egypt is depicted conversing at length with seven ambassadors from the most flourishing states of the time: Rome, Carthage, Sicily, Rhodes, Athens, Sparta, and Sicyon. Each ambassador outlines the three main precepts of their country's political system. The author concludes that if the twenty-one political precepts practiced by the Romans, Carthaginians, Sicilians, Rhodians, Athenians, Spartans, and Sicyonians were mixed or combined, the result would be a mixed republic, or rather, a combined political system that would yield optimal results. The book in our possession only discusses the three precepts of Roman politics, as presented by the fictional Roman ambassador: 'We have great respect and veneration for temples and the homeland. We obediently follow the mandates of our governors and magistrates. We reward the good and punish the wicked severely.'^[32]

According to Miguel Herrero García, República Mista centers its 158 pages on three key precepts: the preservation of religion, the maintenance of authority through obedience, and the proper administration of justice, focusing entirely on religious and legal-political matters. Preceding these chapters is a 16-page preface in which the author defines politics and traces the development of society from the family to the municipality, and from municipalities to provinces and kingdoms. This introduction also explores forms of government and their supporting institutions, discussing the three good regimes: monarchy, aristocracy, and timocracy, and their corrupt counterparts: tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy.^[32]

Medrano accepts the classical view that no single form of government can stand alone without degenerating into its nearest vice unless it is moderated by others. To remain stable and just, republics must incorporate the virtues of multiple regimes. This doctrine, as García observes, was later fully embraced in Fray Juan de Salazar's own attempt to define the Spanish monarchy.^[32]

In a more recent critical study, María López-Asiain offers a political analysis of República Mista, situating it firmly within the political traditions of early 17th-century Spain. According to María López-Asiain, República Mista (1602) by Tomás Fernández de Medrano did not challenge the legitimacy of monarchical sovereignty, which he assumed as a given. His interest lay in the practical workings of monarchical government, which he believed required the obedience of subjects, respect for religion, and strong royal authority. This authority, he declared, could legitimately include reliance on a trusted favorite, "a friend as a faithful servant", to whom certain powers might be delegated.^[45]

Despite its title, the treatise did not advocate for a constitutional, absolute, or limited monarchy. Instead, Medrano defended divine kingship and delegated authority, presenting the role of the favorite not as a threat but as a functional extension of the sovereign's will. His model of a mixed republic was ultimately one of undivided sovereignty with executive functions delegated to a powerful minister (valido) when required. While Medrano acknowledged that such a figure should act within the bounds of the law and under the prince's authority, in practice, he was describing a delegated authority that validos like Lerma exercised in early 17th-century Spain.^[45]

The República Mista (1602), written by Tomás Fernández de Medrano, lord of Valdeosera, dedicated to the 1st valido, and published on the royal press in Madrid by decree of Philip III with approval from the Council of Castile, joins a corpus of works that codified political, legal, moral, and theological doctrine compiled and harmonized by the Medrano family in various statutes, laws, reforms, and treatises.^[4] Rooted in monarchy, aristocracy, and timocracy, the doctrine harmonizes natural and divine precepts such as religion, obedience, and justice, drawn from theology, royal service, and civilizational traditions.^[4] It unites classical philosophy, practical royal administration, and a wide array of disciplines, including jurisprudence and law, canon law, political and military science, education, mathematics, the arts, architecture, civics, and ethics, among others.^{[64][65][66][22]}

The Doctrine of Medrano is a doctrine of sovereignty; the visible union of divine order in law, education, generational service, and delegated moral stewardship under God. This was enacted by the Spanish Empire^[3][67] and allied courts, such as the Duchy of Savoy, to advance and maintain shared prosperity (medrar) under delegated authority achieved by generational continuity, virtue, and merit, bound by precepts and exercised through princes, magistrates, ministers, and subjects.^[1][22][68] The surname Medrano, derived from the verb and etymological root medrar, defines shared advancement, progress, prosperity, or growth through virtue, doctrine, and moral excellence under delegated authority.^[64] Through this grammar of medrar, the House of Medrano operated as one of the most extensive families of legal professionals in the service of the Habsburg and Bourbon Monarchs during the 17th and 18th centuries (known as togados).^{[21][22][68][69]}

According to the República Mista, kingship in the Spanish monarchy was understood as an office ordered toward the well-being and shared prosperity (medrar) of the community, exercised as justice through the person of the king rather than for his private advantage.^[52] The doctrine declares that rulers and their delegates do not act from personal power, but from power entrusted to them by God and law, exercised under reason and judgment.^[1] Delegated authority, as codified in the República Mista, was actively practiced within the Spanish monarchy, Royal Councils, including Castile, the Indies, State, Finance, War, Justice, His Majesty's Chamber, and by high-ranking Crown officials, upholding doctrine, guiding laws, enacting institutional reforms, and maintaining justice across the Empire and its monarchy.^[7][70]

One example of such delegated governance was Bishop Diego Ros de Medrano, Governor Captain General of the Kingdom of Galicia, Doctor of Theology, professor at the Colegio Mayor de San Ildefonso, Canon of the Magistral Church of St. Justo, "whose fame and apostolic calling led him to renounce" promotions to richer and more powerful sees such as Leon, Plasencia, and Santiago, choosing instead to remain "in favor of apostolic poverty" as Bishop of the Diocese of Ourense.^[71][14] In Ourense, the nobility controlled nearly all parish appointments and the great monasteries held more power than the episcopal seat.^[71] Rather than abandon his post, he studied law and Canon law to defend the rights of the mitre and personally presided over archiespiscopal hearings for years.^[71] His tenure is an example of how medrar manifests by governing and enacting justice through delegated authority to restore a kingdom and its people from corruption and decline.^[71][14]

The Doctrine of Medrano was taught to and practiced by ecclesiastics, ministers, magistrates, governors, military, councilors, advisers, professors, secretaries of state and war, jurists, and many other administrators embedded in the kingdom's academies such as the Colegio Mayor de San Ildefonso, and the most powerful judicial bodies, including the Council of the Orders and the Real Audiencia y Chancillería de Valladolid, where successive members of the Medrano family served as oidores, fiscales, and magistrates.^[72][73]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano places religion at the absolute foundation of political legitimacy. In República Mista (1602), he teaches that God is both the origin and end of all things, and that no lawful order can exist without recognition of the Supreme Majesty to whom rulers themselves are subject. Religion is presented as a universal precept of society, present in all peoples and necessary for the establishment of law, justice, and civil order.^[74]

Medrano affirms that throughout nature there exists an inherent delegation of command and obedience, from the heavens to human communities, and that political authority mirrors this divine structure. For this reason, he identifies religion as the principal foundation of republics, of obedience to laws and magistrates, of respect for rulers, and of justice itself, from which all legitimate governance and prosperity must proceed.^[74]

Though not cited in the República Mista, Psalm 106 (Vulgate 105) traces blessedness to the continual practice of justice, teaching that prosperity flows from fidelity to God and is meant to be shared by the righteous as a communal gift.^[75] Jeremiah 29:11 promises a future of peace to those who endure in obedience and justice under divine providence, providing "thoughts of peace and not of affliction, to give you an end and patience."^[76]

The República Mista codifies obedience to God as fundamental to kings, councils, and magistrates, who are recognized as the "image of God" on earth.^[52] Medrano teaches that they must imitate Him in "goodness, perfection, and justice," especially through example, which he calls "the most powerful thing." For this reason, when corruption enters the people, rulers must not be the first to decay. Like the heart of an animal, which "remains the last to corrupt," the prince and magistrates are bound to remain pure and unharmed until the end.^[52]

Tomás observed that belief holds immense power over the human spirit. He affirms:

Ultimately, although all things are created from diverse natures and properties, and entirely opposing forces, they are organized by an incomprehensible wisdom to align toward a single, true, and universal purpose, demonstrating the infinite power of the supreme Creator. This is evident even in the smallest of His works, which are enough to inspire mortal admiration, as He subjected all things to humankind. As all the treasures of divine grace lie with Him alone, and He bestows them so liberally upon humankind, not only for the comfort of this life but for the eternal happiness promised and secured in the immortality of the life to come, He alone is the rightful object of our hope for this possession. Since the beginning of the world, God has claimed for Himself a unique and constant tribute from humankind, that is, love and reverence, as evidence of obedience to His divine Majesty. His power is so great that even in the hearts of those of corrupt lives, insolent behavior, and disdain for civil laws and superiors, one can see a certain recognition and fear of heavenly punishment that pulls them away from their error.^[1]

When belief is false, it acts as a tyrant lodged within the soul, capable of driving a person to ignore even death itself, the most severe trial a mortal can endure.^[1]

Tomás states that certain groups are especially inclined to believe in dreams and superstitions, such as the ringing of the Velilla bell or similar inventions. He teaches that those who are more ignorant than others are therefore more credulous, more fearful, and more attached to superstition. He cites Quintus Curtius, who said that nothing governs the multitude more effectively than superstition, which Tomás identifies as a vice contrary to atheism. Between these two extremes lies true religion, which he affirms is necessary for all people:

For where it is absent, there can be neither virtue, faith, nor courage, as they rest on observing divine precepts and the ordinances of the Holy Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman Church.^[1]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano taught that superstition consists of empty appearances and false imaginings with no basis in truth. He cited Cicero, who said that a person steeped in superstition can never be at peace.

Medrano distinguished between true religion and superstition, noting that "the gods are honored by the religious but feared by the superstitious," as Varro observed. In his judgment, such beliefs easily turn into idolatry:

Such beliefs easily degenerate from true latria, the proper worship and service due to God, into idolatry.^[1]

Medrano affirms that true latria belongs to God alone. The emperor, Tomás explains, must recognize that royal authority was granted not only to rule the empire but specifically to defend the Church, repress the wicked, uphold just order, remove disturbances, and restore peace.^[4]

He recalled how Saint Isidore of Seville addressed princes with these words:

Latin: Cognoscunt Principes sæculi Deo debere se rationem reddere propter Ecclesiam, quam a Christo tuendam suscipiunt. Nam siue augeatur pax, disciplina Ecclesiæ per fideles Principes, siue soluatur; ille ab eis rationem exiget, qui eorum potestati suam Ecclesiam credidit.

English: "The princes of this world understand that they owe an account to God on account of the Church, which they undertake to protect on behalf of Christ. For whether the peace and discipline of the Church is increased by faithful princes, or whether it is diminished, He who entrusted His Church to their power will demand an account from them."^[4]

By citing St. Isidore of Seville, Tomás Fernández de Medrano codified the ordered theological and political delegation of authority under God. Authority originates in God the Father as the ultimate source of latria, is juridically mediated through Christ His Son as Head of the Catholic Church, and is delegated to secular rulers as temporal stewards charged with its protection, who remain accountable to God the Father through the Church. This structure preserves the unity of the divine purpose while maintaining clear distinction between the Persons of the Trinity.^[1][22] Tomás affirmed that if it is strengthened by faithful princes, "God will reward them"; if it is harmed through negligence such as idolatry or superstition, He will demand a strict reckoning.^[7]

For Medrano, these authorities prove that Catholic kings are obligated to defend, preserve, and spread the Catholic Church. Anything less would betray both divine law and the nature of rightful monarchy, "hence, we observe in the universe a single God, creator and governor of all (Rex Deus quifpiam humanus est); in the bees, one queen; in the flock, one shepherd. And for the sake of peace and the preservation of all things, what is more appropriate than to concentrate power in a single ruler?"^[4]

Medrano instructs that Catholic rulers must be borne patiently, for they are given by the hand of one who cannot err. He writes that subjects must also pray humbly for divine help, for God alone governs the hearts of kings and shapes realms and empires as he wills.^[10]

Tomás then quotes Job 5:17–18 with the Latin Increpationem ergo Domini ne reprobes:

Do not despise the correction of the Lord, for he wounds and heals. He strikes, and His hand will heal.^[4]

He continues that these trials, sent from Heaven, afflict no one without the consolation that the same hand that sends them will relieve them at the appointed time. Citing Psalm 82, Deus stetit in Synagoga deorum, Medrano explains that God stands in the assembly of rulers and councils and will judge them. He teaches that "with a single look they will fall and be confounded, not because of their greatness, which may escape our sight, but because they too will be rigorously judged, not by us, but by the Almighty."^[4]

Tomás cites Isaiah 10:1–2 with the Latin Vae qui condunt leges iniquas:

Woe to those who decree unjust laws and write oppressive statutes, who deprive the poor of justice and rob my people of their rights.^[11]

Tomas observes that if false religions followed by apostates and pagans were able to sustain themselves for so long, and even persist in some places as "good religions in the eyes of the ignorant and the blind," then far greater confidence may be placed in true religion:

It pleases and delights our God, from whom it originates, and to whom we owe our being, preservation, and the abundance of goods He so generously provides to both the good and the bad.^[4]

From this foundation, Medrano teaches that Catholics, more than others, are obligated "by the firm hope of salvation promised by Jesus Christ, His Son, seeking nothing more than love and goodwill," joined with the honor, reverence, and service each person must render in proportion to the gifts and graces received from above.^[11]

Medrano writes:

And in proportion to the gifts granted, more is expected in return, for this obedience is founded on the justice given by divine law, the mother and origin of all virtues.^[4]

John 10:10 affirms that the abundance of life is the intended fruit of Christ's headship of the Church, grounding the moral duty of temporal rulers to prevent corruption, enact justice, and cultivate the conditions for virtuous flourishing (medrar): "the thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly."^[77] As John 20:30–31 affirms, Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples that are not written in this book: "these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing, you may have life in his name" by the power of the Holy Spirit through the sacramental mediation of the Catholic Church.^[78]

Drawing upon both classical and sacred precedent to codify obedience as a precept, Tomás Fernández de Medrano wrote that:

The first precepts that the Persians taught their children (as histories recount) were to love, obey, and revere their princes and magistrates.^[3]

Medrano taught that "God found this duty so appropriate that it is taken up throughout Sacred Scripture and by so many prophets," adding that "if even pagans uphold such precepts as right and worthy, it would be fitting for us, as Catholics and Christians, not to ignore them."^[4]

He further observed that the precept of obedience was fundamental to the prosperity (medrar) and good governance of a political state, and that its proper observance should serve as an example to other nations:

If the Romans esteemed this precept as fundamental to the prosperity and good governance of their republic, and with it endured so long, then it is only proper that we should embrace and honor it in such a way that we might serve as an example to other nations, as we have in other matters.^[3]

By citing the Persians and Romans, Medrano established that the path of prosperity was grounded in religion, obedience, and justice as divine precepts, moral cultivation, reverence for legitimate authority, and the unbroken transmission of this doctrine through both royal instruction and lived example.^[7]

Since we are called to serve, love, and revere our eternal God, who created all from nothing, and to attain His Majesty's grace, favor, and assistance in all the needs and trials of our souls, we learn from the Symbol of the Faith, the Lord's Prayer, and the commandments of His holy law. Therefore, as these teachings concern the fourth commandment, it is our duty to instill from the earliest age in our hearts the laws by which we are to hold in awe, respect, obey, and serve Kings, Councils, and Magistrates for the common good.^[3]

Tomas Fernández de Medrano insisted this was already faithfully upheld in Spain:

In Spain, this is preserved and observed with great dedication; the doctrine will serve as theoretical instruction for those who have already learned it through practice and as guidance for those unaware of it.^[3]

Tomás presents the República Mista as a codification of an enduring doctrine already practiced by Spanish society, in which sacred duty, royal legitimacy, and patria were strengthened through instruction, religion, moral formation, and generational service. Medrano codified a body of laws and duties internalized from childhood, binding the soul to God and the subject to the realm.^[3]

Tomas's great-nephew, Diego Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros, lord of Valdeosera and Sojuela, de la Torre, the House of la Vega in La Rioja, and the Palace of Entrena, chaplain to Luis Méndez de Haro, valido of Spain, continued to write doctrinal treatises with the approval of the Spanish monarchs. Diego dedicated his doctrinal treatise Espejo de Príncipes: Crisol de sus Virtudes, Asombro de sus lealdades; Alma de su govierno y govierno de su Alma ("Mirror of Princes: Crucible of his virtues, wonder of his loyalties; soul of his government and government of his soul") (1657–1661) to Philip Prospero, Prince of Asturias, son of Philip IV of Spain.^[67]

In his Mirror of Princes, Diego Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros, as an ecclesiastical representative of Haro, chief minister (valido) under Philip IV, distinguishes the Spanish monarchy as a government structurally distinct from absolutism, instead grounded in delegated authority, counsel, doctrinal instruction, and posterity:

My Lord, Academies have at all times been the Courts of Princes, where the science of governing and the art of directing Empires have always been exercised and refined, and with greater credit than those who merely came to hold power, unless a heroic subject [valido] represented them. The Spanish Monarchy has always been known as outstanding above all others, for priding itself on using a form of government composed in proper balance of natural precepts, giving first place to Catholic laws over political ones; being, and having always been, a firm column that has continually sustained its Catholic truths, intact and defended with letters and with arms, and applauded with religious veneration.

And when, from fragments of the greatest doctrines, precepts could be assembled that might be harmonized, they were always the Spanish Reflections of the Austrias and the Philips, from the first who came to give Spain an untiring Caesar and an invincible Charles; who gave to Castile and León a second Philip, whose fame would have confirmed him as another such, had Heaven not granted Your Highness to us, for the joy of our Spain, as a reward for the sanctity, valor, and pious goodness of the King our Lord; granting him one who, as a true imitator of his forebears, might gain successes by his own steps, and in measured order continue the renown of his name through the ages, and above all the Princes of the world.^[67]

Diego's treatise reaffirmed and extended the established doctrine already followed in Spain, and codified by his great-uncle Tomás in the República Mista (1602). Within the Spanish Empire, a ruler's legitimacy derived not solely from bloodline but from instruction and inherited posterity formed through the unification of sound doctrines, grounded in natural and divine precepts from multiple civilizations, compiled and codified by Houses such as the Medrano family, and reflected by the Spanish monarchy.^[67]

In the sixteenth century, royal education followed an ecclesiastical model established under Charles V and Philip II of Spain, including the appointment of García Loaysa y Girón [es], capellán mayor (chief chaplain), and royal preceptor to Prince Philip, the future Philip III of Spain.^[23] Philip's continuity of ecclesiastical instruction and dynastic formation upheld the tradition that religious leaders, as representives of the ecclesiastical state, held foundational authority in the councils of the Spanish monarchy.^[4]

Writing of the Spanish monarchy in his own time, during the reign of Philip III of Spain, Tomás Fernández de Medrano states:

The Majesty that we now have counts among its councils the most learned and exemplary prelates and religious leaders, following the guidance of Charles V, who would say that such men belonged there, as they represented the ecclesiastical state, which is the foundation of all republics, and because, by the presence of prelates in the councils of princes, what was discussed in these councils would be in service to God.^[1]

Upon the accession of Philip III of Spain, members of the House of Medrano continued to hold positions within the royal court and ecclesiastical administration.^[8] Two years after the ratification of García de Medrano's legal reform of the Order of Santiago, Tomás's nephew, Diego Fernández de Medrano, knight of the Order of Santiago, and father of Diego Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros, lord of Valdeosera, relocated to the royal court in 1607 and served as chaplain of honor, judge of the royal chapel, administrator and deputy of the Royal Hospital of the Court, and testamentary executor to Queen Margaret of Austria. These offices placed Diego within the king's immediate religious and domestic institutions during the early years of the reign.^[8]

In his Mirror of Princes, Tomás's great-nephew Diego Fernández de Medrano cautions the reader not to judge his intentions hastily, or to expect that truth should be softened with flattery. Diego teaches that a mirror that appears clear but is fractured, he explains, no longer reflects truth but becomes an instrument of deception.

Truth is the mirror of Princes, not flattery. Virtue is the mirror of Kings, and Princes must be mirrors of Virtue. There is no greater reason than that which is seen clearly in the mirror of reason. There is no greater mirror than that which is experimented with the lights of reason. Although it is also a mirror that shows reason to those who are deceived. The mirror that shows a Prince as he is, is a mirror of disillusion; but the one that shows how he ought to be is the mirror of reason.^[67]

Diego proposed this with due reverence, and acknowledged how difficult it is to show with certainty. He asks the reader to recognize that, at times he may attribute blame, he assures it is deserved; he attributes this to the difficultly of encountering "confusion among so many mirrors." In this established doctrine, prosperity was both moral and delegated, grounded in the noble path of cultivation, rational order, adherence to natural and divine law, and the preservation of the historical continuity of Imperial and Spanish governance.^[79]

Addressed to Philip Prospero, Prince of Asturias and heir to Philip IV, Diego appears as the swan, offering his final song as a teacher, while the phoenix represents the prince, born through doctrine to embody renewal, sacred kingship and posterity:

I sing as a swan, my Lord, in order to die; make Yourself then a phoenix, so as to fly while presiding over the ages, living through them and granting them space for my affections. While the age, still having but few plants, awaits from Heaven those that continue onward; for the stirrings of mortals, fame promises immortality.^[67]

The Mirror of Princes by Diego continues the tradition of the House of Medrano in transmitting doctrine through princely education, dynastic instruction, political theology, and posterity to the royal line.^[67] For Medrano, as in Tacitus, the highest aim of princely rule was to earn remembrance through virtue, with posterity serving as the measure of glory.^[11]

Diego's Mirror of Princes treatise must be understood within the epistemological current of its time. A 2025 study from Cambridge University states that early modern Spanish thought held appearances to be unreliable and that true knowledge required discerning essence. Catholic doctrine was treated as the only reliable foundation for interpreting reality.^[27]

According to Cambridge University, knowledge in Spain was viewed as a moral enterprise, in which truth could only be reached by distinguishing between the good and the wicked. These philosophical doctrines shaped a wide range of disciplines, including literature and political theory, and showed openness to the precepts of experimental science prior to Bacon or Locke.^[27]

In his La Silva Curiosa (1583), the Navarrese knight Julian Íñiguez de Medrano aligns classical imagery with Christian doctrine. One passage states:

Friend, this is the wheel of fortune, which doth not stay in the same state, but changes with varying fates, raising some while lowering others (...) yet none has escaped his rightful fate under the law of divine order.^[80]

This is followed by a maxim on reform:

He who stumbles but does not fall advances on his way. He who sins and then mends his ways entrusts himself to God. For, as Scripture says: Humanum est errare; sed ferinum et diabolicum perseverare in errare. (To err is human; but to persist in error is beastly and diabolical.)^[80]

Julian further states:

Likewise, you may look upon the lives and examples of the following men as a true mirror of the soul, which being so necessary and beneficial should often be set before our eyes, not only the eyes of the body, but also of the spirit.^[80]

According to Julián Íñiguez and Diego Fernández de Medrano, the mirror of the soul must reflect the mirror of truth, requiring the embodiment of virtue (medrar).^[67] Refusal of this mirror signaled departure from divine order and exposure to disorder (medro).^[80]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano, adviser and counselor to the Kings of Spain at court, codified a structured defense of monarchy as the most natural and most stable form of political order. He begins by noting that many strong arguments have been advanced in favor of the kingdom and the monarchical form, supported by numerous reputable thinkers across history. For Tomás, these ancient authorities sufficiently establish the precept that rule should be unified.^[52]

Still, he notes the difficulties of governance when kings do as they please without anyone to contradict them, an issue he says Spain and the Duchy of Savoy avoid through the Royal Council and Senate of Savoy:

All have their difficulties, and from each side, there are many arguments for and against. "Every kingdom is fluctuating and unstable." It is an arduous task to bear all the burdens of rule. When kings believe they can do as they please without anyone to contradict them, and there is no Magistrate over them, as in other places (such as the Consejo Real in Spain and the Senate in Savoy), they rarely govern well, especially if they misuse their power against their subjects.^[10]

Tomás wrote that King Philip III, having received the kingdom by God, was irreproachable, and he described the Spanish monarchy through the model of Egyptian kingship, presenting it as a divinely ordered form of rule grounded in virtue, discipline, and delegated authority:

The government of a Kingdom is excellent if all Kings were like the one that God has given us (who is irreproachable) or like those of the ancient Egyptians, who long preserved their virtue, through which they earned their dignity without straying from it, keeping it always pure and clean. "They have appointed you as leader; do not exalt yourself, but be among them as one of their own," mindful that if the King is lord of all, he is also, with all, a servant of God.^[11]

He explains that the virtue of the ancient Egyptian monarchy rested on strict discipline, especially in matters of taxation, and on their rule that kings should employ only noble youths of at least twenty years of age, thoroughly trained in all the sciences. This was to ensure that a king, influenced by the virtue of those around him, would avoid falling into reprehensible conduct.^[4]

Tomás adds a warning that nothing corrupts princes more quickly than depraved servants who feed their disordered desires, for:

He who associates with the wicked either suffers ill or learns something wicked.^[1]

Tomás then describes the model of royal daily governance in Ancient Egypt. The king would rise early, and before doing anything else, give audience and receive letters and petitions so that urgent matters would be resolved and all business guided by order and reason. After this, he would go to the Temple to give religious offerings. There, the prelate and chief priest would publicly proclaim, before the people, the virtues that shone in the king, affirming the maxim:

"Virtue praised grows."^[4]

Turning to him, the priest would exhort him to uphold religion and treat others humanely, presenting himself to all as temperate, just, magnanimous, truthful, generous, and moderate in all his desires, punishing wrongdoers with penalties more lenient than their crimes deserved, and rewarding his subjects with gifts and benefits beyond their merits.^[63]

Tomás writes that once daily duties were completed, the king in Egypt would exhort his ministers to live in a manner pleasing to the "gods," reminding them that "food and drink are not the cause of the kingdom, but justice." Instruction was given through examples drawn from ancient practitioners of every virtue, grounding rule in moral formation rather than material abundance.^[63]

Medrano then sets out, in explicit terms, the distinction between the tyrant and the just king. The tyrant, he writes, cares nothing for piety, justice, or faith, but acts only for his own interest, vengeance, or pleasure. By contrast, "the just King conforms entirely with the laws and the will of the gods." The just king seeks to enrich his subjects, avenges public injuries while forgiving personal ones, protects the honor of maidens and virtuous women, and welcomes free counsel so that he may correct his errors for the public good. He values the love of the people and does not rule through suspicion.^[63]

The tyrant, on the other hand, ruins his subjects, avenges private injuries while neglecting public justice, violates chastity, resents correction from serious and virtuous men, governs by fear, and suspects all. Where the just king burdens his people only with what is unavoidable for the common good, the tyrant:

"draws the blood and marrow from the bones of his subjects to satisfy his desires."^[63]

For Medrano, the consequence is decisive: the king lives in peace and is honored in life and mourned in death, while the tyrant lives in perpetual fear and is reviled both in life and after it. Having received this instruction, each would then withdraw to attend to his appointed duties.^[63]

Ultimately, Medrano affirms:

"All agree that the kingdom is, among divine and human goods, the greatest, most august, and most highly to be aspired to."^[63]

The House of Medrano begins with its progenitor, Andrés Vélaz de Medrano, Moorish prince of the Caliphate of Córdoba and the first bearer of the surname as vocation.^[81][82] His entry into Navarre and conversion to Christianity in 979 during the reign of Sancho II of Pamplona, earned the trust and royal favor of his successor King García Sánchez II of Pamplona.^[81] As he was very powerful among the Moors, a prosperous prince and a lord of many vassals, which he then lost, Hisham II asked his courtiers if he was thriving or not: “Medra or no?" His courtiers answered: "no." Hearing this, Andrés Vélaz claimed for himself the name Medrano.^[82]

As a leader of Christians, devoted to the Virgin Mary even before baptism, Andrés Vélaz de Medrano, knight of Navarre, established the Medrano dynasty as hereditary lords of Igúzquiza, preserving his mandate and jurisdictional continuity under delegated authority.^[83][81] Andrés' direct descendant Blas Íñiguez de Medrano appears in a 2 November 1044 donation record under García Sánchez III of Pamplona, holding land in Viero within the jurisdiction of Santa María la Real de Nájera.^[84]

With the approval of the king of Pamplona in the early 11th century, construction of the Palace of Vélaz de Medrano began.^[85] The palace features a water conduit supporting a pilgrim hospital that belonged the Order of St. John,^[86] a horseshoe arched doorway, and Andres Vélaz de Medrano's coat of arms on its keystone: a goshawk on his hand with the Ave Maria and eight crosses of Saint Andrew.^[83] His palace, designated a palacio de cabo de armería [es] of Navarre for centuries, became the ancestral seat of the Medrano family and his hereditary lordship of Igúzquiza, who also served as alcaides of the Monjardin castle close by.^[81][87][82]

In the Kingdom of Castile, Andrés' descendant María Ramírez de Medrano built a hospital, convent, commandary, and church for to the Order of St. John in 1185, supported by her son Martin de Baztán y Medrano, Bishop of Osma during Saint Dominic's entry into Osma's Cathedral. Decades later, Andres' heirs pledge their patronage to the Francisan Order after an encounter with Saint Francis of Assisi himself in 1211, who entered the castle of Aguas Mansas and miraculously healed the heir and son of the Lord of Agoncillo from the House of Medrano, preserving the lineage and lordship. Medrano donated their land and a tower in Logronõ to Saint Francis, for him to establish the first convent of the Franciscans in Spain; a chaplaincy patronage secured in perpetuity by Diego López de Medrano, Lord of Agoncillo, lawyer, ambassador and High Steward of John I of Castile.^[88][89]

Andrés's direct descendant and heir, Juan Vélaz de Medrano, lord of Igúzquiza, alcaide of Monjardin and Viana, great-grandson of Juan Martínez de Medrano, regent of Navarre, judge of the Cortes, became royal chamberlain to the king Charles III and king John II, and went on a royal pilgrimage to the Cathedral-Basilica of Our Lady of the Pillar alongside Queen Blanche I of Navarre in 1433.^[90] In addition to Igúzquiza, and as a ricohombre of Navarre, Juan Vélaz de Medrano held the lordships of Arguiñano, Arzoz, Artazu, Zabal, and Orendáin.^[91] In 1437, he exemplified the act of medrar by uniting these lordships into the mayorazgo of Vélaz de Medrano, the oldest documented hereditary majorat in Viana.^[92]

The continuity of Andrés' Vélaz de Medrano's lineage was reaffirmed in 1682, when Antonio Vélaz de Medrano, having submitted proof of his descent from Andrés and of his own service before the Council of Castile, was granted the title Marquess of Tabuérniga de Vélazar by King Charles II.^[81][93][27]

The surname Medrano derives from the Spanish verb medrar, meaning:

to flourish, improve, advance, grow, or prosper.^[94][95][96]

In his 1492 Latin-Spanish dictionary, Antonio de Nebrija defined medrar as Proficio: "to make progress."^[95] Pedro Felipe Monlau viewed it as related to mejorar, from the Latin melior ("better"), while Joan Corominas traced the early form medranza, meaning "hereditary improvement," to a 1076 context tied to noble succession.^[97]

Ramón Menéndez Pidal identified Medrano as a surname historically linked to noble service and legitimate advancement and prosperity.^[98] This etymology shows that hereditary improvement, advancement, growth, and prosperity formed the linguistic and genealogical basis for medrar as a doctrine transmitted across dynasties and institutions.^[97]

Ángel Campos-Perales notes that the grammar of medrar functioned as the operative verb of court society, especially under the validos, where it expressed advancement and prosperity through visibility, proximity, and service.^[12] The triad "to medrar, to live, to die" governed courtly life, reputation, honorable succession, shared advancement, and posterity.^[12] The verb medrar forms a moral grammatical chain: to flourish, improve, advance, grow, and to prosper. Each word builds upon delegated service and visible merit.^[95][97]

The Viaje de Turquía (c. 1557) presents medrar in the life of Pedro de Urdemalas, a knight whose adventures among the Ottomans lead to both social and moral transformation. Pedro's eventual mission is governed by divine law and directed from medro toward medrar.^[99][100] He presents medrar as the normative pattern of advancement in ordered society, tied to honorable company, not personal gain:

Medrar is a virtue of great value. Success is dependent upon medrar. I sought good company and sought to be among the fellowship of gentlemen.^[99][100]

Medraron is the third-person plural preterite of medrar, used historically to describe those who virtuously prospered under a shared condition of service exercised visibly under delegated authority.^[12] This usage governed the grammar of courtly life, where prosperity and abundance were earned through fidelity to precepts received by divine and juridical order.^[12]

Indirectly exemplified by the República Mista, medrar's anithesis, medro, breaks this chain. It imitates progress while bypassing virtue, seeking power without justice, prosperity without growth, and advancement without legitimacy.^[101] To distinguish medrar as a manifestation of justice under delegated authority, Spain's Golden Age literature used the first-person singular term medro ("I prosper") to depict a corrupt form of self-serving social advancement from society's margins, without justice or earned delegated authority.^[101] Medro, a depraved form of prosperity, represents false advancement used by the wicked. While not cited in the República Mista, Isaiah 54:17 declares the inevitable failure of all attempts at medro: "No weapon that is fashioned against you shall prosper."^[102]

Medro is illustrated in Picaresque novels and comedia, and represents self-serving ambition, flattery, corruption, deceit, and opportunism. Medro is completely detached from merit, delegation, and divine order.^[101] Works such as Lazarillo de Tormes (1554), Guzmán de Alfarache (1599/1604), and El Buscón (1626) portrayed the pícaro's success as a parasitic strategy: attaching oneself to power without regard to moral law, divine order, or legitimate service.^{[101][103][104][100]}

According to Maravall, the pícaro's ambition leads him to abandon his family sphere and the protection and affections it provides, since no other compensatory satisfaction remains but success; therefore, the "aspiration to medrar, by leaping over whatever stands in the way, will become his sole objective," inevitably turning into medro.^[104]

As Maravall notes:

"The pícaro leaves his environment to affirm his self, stifled by social pressure, and believes that the achievement of his aim can be demonstrated by showing his successful path."^[103]

In the República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano affirms that prosperity (medrar) arises when religion, obedience, and justice for the common good are held in harmony. He cautions that pride and ambition, especially the desire to exceed one's condition, disturb that order and threaten the republic:

"A good subject should be humble, gracious, obedient, and devout, not proud, ambitious, or idle. It is critical for both great and small to be content in their stations without aspirations for higher ranks than suit their condition, lest they disrupt the republic by their ambition."^[4]

To sustain medrar, Tomás Fernández de Medrano affirms that reverence toward authority must not falter, even under severe rulers. Citing 1 Peter 2:18, Servi subditi estote in omni timore dominis, non-tantum bonis et modestis, sed etiam discolis ("Be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to the kind and gentle but also to the harsh"), he upholds obedience as a constant duty. He reinforces this with Tacitus: Quo modo sterilitatem, aut nimios imbres, tolerate ("Just as we endure droughts or floods, so must we endure the faults of rulers"), placing all governance within divine order.

Through the prophet Jeremiah, we see another command from God to His people: that they seek the prosperity of Babylon, where they were held in captivity, and pray for it, for in its peace lies their own. Querite pacem civitatis ad quam transmigrare vos feci, et orate pro ea ad Dominum, quia in pace illius erit pax vobis ("Seek the peace of the city to which I have carried you in exile, and pray to the Lord for it, because in its peace you will find your own").^[7]

Tomás identified a good subject with obedience to their leaders and a "willing heart, as this is the command of the Lord." Medrano recites Matthew 23:3: Omnia ergo quaecumque dixerint vobis, servate, facite ("Therefore, keep and do whatever they tell you"). He writes, Qui Dei praecepta contemnit, Deum non-diligit ("He who disregards God's commandments does not love Him"). Medrano safeguards the public by quoting St. Isidore: Neque enim Regem diligimus, si odio leges eius habemus ("We do not love the King if we despise his laws").^[1]

The Medrano lineage, a surname etymologically derived from the verb medrar,^[97] held this vocation through continuous service as counselors, high stewards, treasurers, tutors, jurists, chaplains, governors, and magistrates.^[67] The grammar of medrar became central to the legal and institutional structure governing the court and the Spanish world.^{[22][12][67][64]}

Luisa de Medrano (1484–1527), a Basque-Castilian poet, philosopher, and scholar, is an early example of medrar in vocational practice. Educated in the court of Queen Isabella I and later appointed a role at the University of Salamanca, she is regarded by many as the first female professor in Europe.^[105] Her rise reflected deliberate intellectual formation from childhood, a core precept later codified in República Mista.^[1] Praised by Lucio Marineo Siculo for surpassing male contemporaries,^[106] she was recorded at the university in 1508, lecturing in Latin and succeeding Antonio de Nebrija, the very grammarian who defined medrar.^[107][95] Her legacy was later dramatized in the 2018 theatrical work Historia de una doncella elocuentísima, staged at the Instituto Lucía de Medrano attached to the University of Salamanca. The play emphasized Luisa as a figure of intellectual virtue and doctrinal continuity under the Trastámara dynasty.^[108]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano uses Philip III's campaign in Algiers to demonstrate that true prosperity (medrar) is grounded in prudent and righteous counsel, not in visible gain or loss:

Who could deny that, as we have seen in both ancient and modern times, no endeavor has been more prudently or providently undertaken than the great task now before us in Algiers? Although it is one of the most costly and challenging ventures, every part and circumstance of its undertaking, guided by wisdom, brings glory to our most illustrious king and to those close to him. It appears destined for success, even with the uncertainties of war.^[1]

Tomás affirms royal authority is a divine trust, and rulers are judged first by the justice of their counsel, not by the immediate outcome of events. Even costly or unsuccessful campaigns remain acts of medrar when ordered by faith, prudence, and legitimate authority. By contrast, success achieved through poor counsel or ambition belongs to medro, however prosperous it may appear.

Medrano reaffirmed Philip III's decision to send aid to Irish Catholics through the Fourth Spanish Armada as an act ordered to the restoration of divine and juridical order:

Even at this very moment, when the world believed this monarchy to be weakened, diminished, and drained, His Majesty, driven by holy zeal, has sent forth an armada to assist the Catholics of Ireland. Should the outcome fall short of expectations, who could be blamed? And if it succeeds, who would doubt that God alone has a hand in this work?

For Tomás, this campaign illustrates that royal legitimacy does not rest on visible success but on counsel aligned with divine justice. Kings are tested by God through adversity; failure does not nullify righteousness when intention and authority remain ordered. In this way, medrar is preserved even under apparent loss.

Citing Herodotus, Tomás rejects the common habit of equating success with righteousness. He teaches that true prosperity (medrar) is grounded in wise and just counsel, even when events turn adverse, while corrupt prosperity (medro), through ambition, remains disordered even when fortune produces visible success:

"There is great profit in wise counsel. For even if events turn out differently, fortune nevertheless favors a well-laid plan. But if a man takes poor counsel and luck happens to smile on him, though he may achieve his goal, it is still poor counsel." As the author and learned scholar of governance rightly tells us, what an unjust condition accompanies the matters of war! Prospera omnes sibi vendicant; adversa pœni imputantur ("All claim success in prosperity, while adversity is attributed to others").

In Phelipe Medrano's Quadrados mágicos (1744), medrar and the Doctrine of Medrano reached a synthesis of sacred mathematics and theology.^[12] Joseph Cañizares dedicated a sonnet to the work, affirming that Socrates and Plato, in exploring numerical truth, followed the Pythagorean path, while the Tarentine and others seeking the soul's order found their method through Nicomachus and the discipline of Arithmos. However, Cañizares declared that only Phelipe, without north or guide, and by influences of Numen, "brilliant mists," showed the day:

the cheerful, vain Egyptian may say, My weak Arithmetical harmony, If it began to medrar, it is because of MEDRANO."^[109]

Others, including Ignacio de Loyola y Oyanguren and the Marquess of La Olmeda, praised Phelipe's contribution to truth and Christian arithmetic.^[64]

Olmeda celebrated Phelipe's father Pedro Medrano as a "living archive" and a Cassiodorus of the world as royal secretary of the king.^[64] Pedro's career in the Secretary of State for Italy under Charles II formed the administrative foundation on which Phelipe wrote his mathematical treatise.^[64]

Olmeda concluded that Phelipe's knowledge was so effective:

That, once acquired, your knowledge becomes inherited.^[64]

The Cañizares and the Marquess illustrate how medrar was the operating verb of court society and the grammar of a long-standing hereditary and institutional doctrine applied across councils, courts, universities, colegios, churches, magistracies, royal service, and generations within the Spanish Empire.^[4]

Diego de Medrano y Treviño, Minister of the Interior and Vice President of the Estates Proceres and Chamber of Peers (1835), concluded his public treatise by reaffirming that true progress requires stability, virtue, and practical improvement. Writing in the aftermath of national disorder, he identified the province of Ciudad Real and Spain as a land both wounded and worthy, and called for its restoration and a state of prosperity (medrar) and fortune through justice, work, and moral order:

It is just, then, that it rise from the state of abjection in which it has found itself. It is just that it nourish hopes of a promising future. It is just, finally, that it be promised the state of prosperity and fortune to which it is susceptible. And why not?^[66]

Diego de Medrano y Treviño recognized that a sincere desire for good could lead judgment astray, and that patriotic love might give rise to hopes so uncertain that even their path to fulfillment remained unclear. Still, he affirmed that good intentions excuse errors, and that if the expression of such intentions inspired wiser and more capable individuals to correct those errors with sound measures, it would not be the first time that "the boldness of the ignorant awakened the zeal of the wise."^[66]

Diego de Medrano y Treviño closed his Consideraciones by affirming the primacy of merit and virtuous service:

Let good be done, and little or nothing will it matter where it came from.^[66]

Medrar is a theological and hereditary vocation, virtue, and precept not limited to Spain, but applicable to any people, government, and era that seeks prosperity through just rule only when its composite precepts of religion, justice, and obedience are harmonized and maintaned for posterity.^[11] "Medrar, Vivir, Morir" (we prosper, we live, we die) is a civil grammar that defined the Spanish life cycle.^[12] It allows a society to advance and prosper virtously, live in justice and divine order, and die with the public remembrance of their example. This condition of shared prosperity and continuity comes from the good deeds of virtuous men in service to God, the king, and the republic.^[1]

Medrar as a grammar of court society relied on the foundational precepts of religion, obedience, and justice, later codified as formal doctrine in the first volume of the República Mista, a treatise not produced in abstraction. This doctrine had already been upheld by the Spanish monarchs and their ancestors, validated through the careers of the nobility for centuries, and confirmed by executive letters (carta ejecutoria).^[110] According to a 2025 publication from Cambridge University, the precept that service to the Crown constituted a generational duty, rather than an individual accomplishment, was embedded in early modern royal administration.^[27]

The vocation and precept of medrar was often expressed in handwritten testimonies of merit and services (informaciones de méritos y servicios) submitted by officials to the Crown, including Antonio Vélaz de Medrano, 1st Marquess of Tabuérniga, Governor of Nieuwpoort, presented to the Council of Castile in 1676.^[81] The nobility exercising power across diverse regions of the empire gave these men deep, firsthand insight into the state of the monarchy and the distinct conditions of its territories, from Europe to the Americas.^[27] Through their direct involvement in distant provinces and colonial administrations, they maintained a personal and practical understanding of how imperial authority functioned across the Spanish world.^[27]

By exercising their ecclesiastical and delegated authority in royal courts, universities, Colegios, the Royal Councils, the Military Orders, and the kings Chambers, the House of Medrano were given permission by the kings to codify and implement the doctrine as state law in practice.^[73][21]

Though widely institutionalized during the Habsburg period, the doctrine codified in the first volume of the República Mista did not originate there. It drew directly from classical, historical, and contemporary models, incorporating influences from ancient and sacred scripture, along with legal traditions, doctrines, and precepts from:

• Castilians
• Navarrese
• Egyptians
• Moors
• Persians
• Romans
• Greeks, and others.^[11]

Early codifications include the 1330 reform of the Fueros of Navarre by Juan Martínez de Medrano, regent of the Kingdom of Navarre, alongside his son Álvaro Díaz de Medrano;^[112] and the Treaty of Bayonne (1388), after Diego López de Medrano, High Steward of John I of Castile, secured peace with John of Gaunt in 1386.^[113]

With the approval granted to them by Monarchs, Emperors, and Popes, the House of Medrano maintained consistent roles to codify, enact, and refine doctrine:

• codified by Tomás Fernández de Medrano in his República Mista (1602), dedicated to Francisco de Sandoval y Rojas, 1st Duke of Lerma, 1st valido (royal favorite) of Spain.^[63]
• Codified and defended in the Papal Legal Brief on the Privileges of the Order of Saint John, written by Tomás Fernández de Medrano in 1605, commissioned by Pope Paul V, printed in Rome, and praised by King Philip III.^[114]
• Ratified by Philip III through the laws, statutes and jurisdiction of the Order of Santiago (1601–1605) by the jurist García de Medrano y Castejón, knight of Santiago, and a Councilor of the Council of Castile, the Council of Justice, and the Council of the Orders.^[22]
• Codified through cultural authority, institutional censorship, and poetic doctrine by Sebastián Francisco de Medrano, chief chaplain in Madrid, founder and president of the Medrano Academy of Madrid (1616–1622), official censor of comedias in the Inquisition, Protonotary apostolic, Apostolic Judge, chaplain and treasurer to Gómez Suárez de Figueroa, III Duke of Feria, and author of Favores de las Musas (1631) and Caridad y Misericordia (1652).^[115]
• Codified through princely education and international diplomacy by Diego Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros, great-nephew of Tomás, who composed Mirror of Princes for Prince Philip Prospero between 1657 and 1661. As his chaplain, he dedicated a political and doctrinal panegyric to Luis Méndez de Haro, valido of Philip IV, and reaffirmed the core precepts of República Mista through their shared diplomatic role at the Treaty of the Pyrenees.^[51][67]
• Institutionalized and codified in the educational royal reform of the Colegio Mayor de San Ildefonso (1666), the Colegio de San Eugenio, the Colegio de Santa Catalina de los Medrano, and numerous other colegios led and united by Dr. García de Medrano y Álvarez de los Ríos.^[68]
• Militarily and educationally codified through the Royal Military and Mathematics Academy of Brussels (1675), founded and directed by Sebastián Fernández de Medrano, General Prefect to the King, Captain and Maestre de campo of the Spanish Tercio, General of Artillery, Chief Artillery Engineer of the Kingdom, and Royal Master of Mathematics in the States of Flanders.^[65] He presented and taught doctrine to Joseph Ferdinand, Prince of Bavaria, dedicating his treatise to the prince in 1696, two years before Joseph's designation as heir to the Spanish Empire in 1698.^[116]
• Exemplary through poetry and philosophy in La Silva Curiosa (1583) dedicated to Queen Margaret de Valois by Julián Íñiguez de Medrano, courtier, Navarrese knight, and early literary architect of the doctrine.
• Extended into the Americas by Juan de Espinosa Medrano (El Lunarejo), Indigenous nobleman and chaplain to Luis Méndez de Haro, valido of Philip IV. He addressed Haro in the dedication of the Apologético (1662) and later wrote the Philosophia Thomistica (1688).

18th and 19th century codifications of the doctrine:

• Architecturally codified and educationally transmitted to the Bourbon princes by Giovanni Antonio Medrano (1703–1760), also known as Juan Antonio Fernández de Medrano, chief royal architect of Naples, military engineer, and educator to Charles III, Ferdinand VI and their princely brothers.^[117][13] Medrano provided Charles with the means to affirm his legitimacy by educating him and designing the Palace of Capodimonte, the Obelisk of Bitonto, and the Teatro di San Carlo, the oldest continuously active venue for opera in the world.^[13]
• Encoded in sacralized mathematics in Quadrados Mágicos (1744) by Phelipe Medrano, dedicated to Queen Elisabeth Farnese.^[118]
• Defended in the 18th century by Jaime Vélaz de Medrano y Barros, III Marquess of Tabuérniga, through his 1730 Representación to Prince Ferdinand (the future Ferdinand VI) and enacted in the form of a diplomatic mission from London to meet Sebastián de la Cuadra Medrano y Llarena, first secretary of state for Ferdinand VI, and secure a peace treaty on behalf of England and Spain, as he pledged in London to both the Prince of Wales and King George II in an attempt to end the War of Jenkins' Ear.^[119]
• Preserved by Fernando Vélaz de Medrano y Bracamonte, 4th Marquess of Tabuérniga, Grandee of Spain, through his letters to Charles, Prince of Asturias, upholding the Doctrine of Medrano during the fiscal Bourbon Reforms. His denouncement of corruption in the Americas and Europe came from a result of unjust ministers, and was exiled by José de Galvez, minister of the Indies, for appealing to the conscience of Prince Charles.^[120]
• Codified in the Act of Independence of Central America by Tomás Fernandez de Medrano's descendant Gabino Gaínza Fernández de Medrano, who, as Superior Political Chief (head of state), signed the Plan Pacifico and the Act of Independence on 15 September 1821, marking the only peaceful and doctrinal transition to independence in the Americas.^[121]
• Codified and refined into civic doctrine and public institutions by Diego de Medrano y Treviño, Minister of the Interior of Spain (1835), Civil Governor of the Province of Ciudad-Real (1834–1835). Diego wrote a legal-political treatise titled Consideraciones (1843), which affirmed true progress and prosperity (medrar) as a civic and moral foundation for all of Spain and the Province of Ciudad Real.^[66]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano served as Counselor and Secretary of State and War to the Princes of Savoy, grandchildren of Philip II of Spain.^[8] The case of Prince Emmanuel Philibert of Savoy, often styled "of Austria," illustrates how dynastic legitimacy could be identified through doctrinal mediation and courtly practice. Born to Charles Emmanuel I, Duke of Savoy, and Infanta Catalina Micaela of Spain, Philibert united Savoyard and Habsburg bloodlines. His appointments as Grand Prior of Castile in the Order of Saint John, Admiral of the Mediterranean Fleet, and Viceroy of Sicily placed him within the Spanish monarchy's military and religious command.^[122]

The Spanish court treated him with the honors of a Habsburg prince. Upon his death in 1624, Philip IV ordered his burial in the royal pantheon of El Escorial with the rites of an infante.^[122] As Geevers notes, dynastic identity was not biological but identified through genealogies, testaments, appointments, and burial. Philibert's maternal ancestry and official treatment effectively made him part of the House of Austria.^[122]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano, as Philibert's secretary and manager of the Grand Priorate of Castile, safeguarded this legitimacy. A 1603 letter records Philibert's instructions leaving "my secretary and knight of my habit" in Madrid to oversee "all the matters of the Religion [of St. John] that are of my office and his."^[8] Through his service, Tomás Fernández de Medrano linked Savoyard inheritance to Spanish institutions and gave administrative reality to dynastic theology.^[8] The recognition of Philibert as "of Austria" exemplifies what Diego Fernández de Medrano later described in his Mirror of Princes: the doctrine as "the reflection" of the Spanish Habsburgs, defining the standard of lawful princely authority.^[67]

A parallel appears in the Americas with Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo de Medrano, son and heir of the conquistador Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo.^[123] His descendants in Guatemala used the Medrano surname in official records, establishing it as a hereditary marker.^[124] Cabrillo de Medrano's grandson, Esteban de Medrano y Solórzano, claimed descent as heir of the conquistador and served as regidor and royal chancellor of the Real Audiencia of Santiago de Guatemala in 1670.^[124][125] As Philibert was doctrinally identified as "of Austria" through courtly and ecclesiastical mediation, Cabrillo's heirs were incorporated "of Medrano," through institutional office and genealogical affirmation, allowing their descendants to medraron within the laws of advancement.^[124]

The Doctrine of Medrano was not a speculative ideology but a complete universal doctrine, combining juridical, theological, political, cultural, scientific, and moral fields, designed for both practical governance and shared advancement and prosperity (medrar). Within the medieval kingdoms of Iberia and the later Spanish Empire, the transmission and enactment of harmonized doctrines grounded in natural and divine precepts occurred through delegated authority, expressed in royal councils, chaplaincies, diplomacy, military command, education, and virtuous governance under delegated authority. The foundational precepts of religion, obedience, and justice governed the regency of the Kingdom of Navarre (1328–1705) through Juan Martínez, García, and Pedro Antonio de Medrano.^[126] This governance extended into ecclesiastical and juridical offices, including the Real Audiencias, through inquisitors and magistrates such as Juan Antonio de Medrano, fiscal of the Royal Council of Navarre, and Alonso Molina de Medrano, Councilor of Castile, the Indies, and Finance.^[127]

During the Bourbon era, it was defended and preserved by those close to the Princes of Austurias, such as Jaime Vélaz de Medrano, 3rd Marquess of Tabuérniga de Vélazar, Lieutenant of the Spanish Royal Guards, and his son Fernando Vélaz de Medrano, 4th Marquess of Tabuérniga de Vélazar, twice a Grandee of Spain, entrusted with the safety, conscience, and counsel of Ferdinand VI and Charles IV.^[119][120] In the Royal Council's, it was enacted by ministers and councilors such as Francisco de Medrano y Bazán, Minister in the Royal Council of Castile, García de Medrano, 1st Count of Torrubia, Councilor of the Chamber of His Majesty, Andrés de Medrano y Mendizábal, 2nd Count of Torrubia, Dean of the Royal Council of Castile, and Baltasar Álvarez de Medrano, Minister of the Council of Finance.^[128]

In the Americas, the Doctrine of Medrano was enacted by governors Juan de Medrano y Mesía, Diego Fernández de Medrano y Zapata, lord of Regajal, and by Diego's great-grandson Gabino Gaínza Fernández de Medrano, who declared a peaceful independence for Central America on 15 September 1821. This act unified five nations under a single republic by means of the Plan Pacífico, establishing an independent Central American government under the leadership of Gaínza Fernández de Medrano.^[129]

Recent scholarship from Cambridge University has affirmed that early modern governance in the Americas operated through multiple republics functioning within a unified imperial structure.^[130] A letter attributed to the viceroy of Peru in the 1630s described the "New World" as a republic composed of distinct bodies, including a "republic of the Indians, of citizens, of merchants, and of miners."^[130]

Iberian and Indies thinkers described a republic as:

"A community constituted into a political body, ruled by justice and law, whose end was the common good, regardless of its form of government."^[130]

The Cambridge study directly cites República Mista as an early codification of this doctrine, affirming that such republics operated under a harmonized legal and theological order.^[130]

This juridical republic was doctrinally substantiated by Juan de Espinosa Medrano's scholastic defense of universal essences and legitimate delegation, integrating both Castilian and Indigenous republics into a single juridical and philosophical system. Juan de Espinosa Medrano, chaplain to Luis Méndez de Haro, valido of Philip IV, served as priest of Cuzco. Although often mislabeled as criollo, he was a nobleman by lineage, of Indigenous heritage, educated and ordained in Cuzco.^[131] He advanced the Ibero-American intellectual tradition in both political doctrine and literary theology.^[132]

A playwright and polyglot, Juan de Espinosa Medrano translated Virgil into Quechua.^[133] His Philosophia Thomistica (1688) defended the doctrine in scholastic form, combining Aristotelian logic with Platonic metaphysics. He defended Plato's theory of ideas as "species and universal essences," an original and rare position in seventeenth-century Second Scholasticism.^[132]

Espinosa Medrano's aims were twofold: to defend doctrine and traditional philosophy against Jesuit "moderns" such as Pedro Hurtado de Mendoza and Rodrigo de Arriaga, and to uphold Ibero-American intellectual dignity against European critics who dismissed it as inferior.^[134]

Responding to Justus Lipsius, he cited Jerónimo de Valera:

God is so powerful that He can raise children of Abraham from Peruvian stones.^[135]

This positioned Andean learning within the universal system of the Doctrine of Medrano, applicable in both Europe and the Americas.^[132] His polemic against Manuel de Faria e Sousa engaged the ideological split after the 1640 separation of the Iberian crowns.^[131] Rather than adopt anti-Spanish rhetoric, he defended Castilian baroque literature, and upheld the intellectual participation of the Andes within the Spanish monarchy.^[131]

By the 1760s, the monarchy's trust in the Jesuit order had deteriorated significantly. Historians of the Jesuits in both Spanish and Portuguese dominions characterize the years between 1701 or 1704 and the 1773 suppression as a prolonged "period of stress."^[136] Under the reign of Charles III (1759–1786), a doctrinal king educated by Giovanni Antonio Medrano, tensions between Jesuits and the monarchy increased across Spain and its American provinces.^[136] Following the Jesuit expulsion by Charles III, regions such as Petén and the Paraguayan frontier with Brazil and Argentina continued to practice their Indigenous languages and cultures.^[136]

One of the earliest examples of medrar and the doctrine occurred in the Kingdom of Navarre. In 1328, Juan Martínez de Medrano, baron of Sartaguda, Arróniz, Villatuerta, and alcaide of Viana, was elected regent of Navarre during the interregnum following the death of Charles IV of France, the last king of the senior Capetian line.^[137] For nearly a year, in a kingdom without a king, he exercised regal and delegated authority with the consent of the Cortes, towns, and nobility.^[137][138]

Using the Medrano family seal in place of the absent royal one, he made visible delegated authority later codified in the República Mista. He imposed loyalty oaths, confirmed the succession of Joan II and Philip of Évreux, reformed taxation, modernized the judiciary, and represented Navarre diplomatically before France and Rome. His acts anticipate the eight royal Regalia codified by Tomás in his República Mista.^[139][11] As ricohombre of Navarre, Juan Martínez de Medrano represented the kingdom before the senior Capetian kings of France, witnessing the oath of Philip V in 1319 and later serving under Charles IV of France.^[139][112] Juan had long represented the Navarrese estates, and as judge of the Cortes, he presided with his son over the 1330 Amejoramiento of the Fuero General of Navarre, a 34-chapter legal reform.^[112] Their reform preserved institutional continuity in Navarre while placing royal power under covenant with the fueros.^[112]

The Medrano family's hollow cross fleury banner had flown under Juan's great-grandfather Pedro González de Medrano and Martin López de Medrano at Las Navas de Tolosa in 1212.^[83][140] That same emblem later appeared on Tomás's coat of arms.^[139] The family's affiliation with the Orders of Saint John, Calatrava, and Santiago affirmed their institutional role.^[8] Juan's son and heir, Juan Vélaz de Medrano, served as alcaide of Viana in 1328.^[141] His grandson Alvar Díaz de Medrano y Almoravid, Lord of Igúzquiza, became a mesnaderos of the king and a ricohombre of Navarre.^[142][83] The castle-palace of Vélaz de Medrano guarded the Merindad of Estella and remained the family's ancestral seat in the Kingdom of Navarre.^[143][144]

After the regency of Juan Martínez de Medrano in 1328 secured peace, dynastic continuity and posterity in the Kingdom of Navarre, Diego López de Medrano, Lord of Agoncillo, lawyer, ambassador, and High Steward to King John I of Castile, was entrusted with a pivotal diplomatic mission in 1386 to meet John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, who had landed in Galicia asserting a claim to the Castilian throne through his wife, Constance of Castile, daughter of Peter I of Castile.^[145] Diego López de Medrano, accompanied by Prior Juan de Serrano and Doctor Alvar Martínez de Villareal, delivered King John's reply in a formal audience.^[146]

He spoke in front of John of Gaunt and all of the principal lords and knights of England with delegated authority on behalf of John I of Castile, affirming the king's legitimacy and offering terms of personal or representative combat:^[146]

for the service of God and to avoid the spilling of Christian blood.^[146]

This intervention led to days of deliberation and a peaceful agreement. The result was the Treaty of Bayonne in 1388. John of Gaunt renounced his claim in exchange for 600,000 gold francs, an annuity approved by the high steward of Castile, and the marriage of his daughter Catherine to the future Henry III of Castile, a union that gave birth to John II of Castile.^[147] This agreement established dynastic legitimacy through the Trastámara line and created the title Prince of Asturias.^[148] To preserve dynastic legitimacy following the union of Henry III and Catherine of Lancaster, another Diego López de Medrano, linked to the lordship of San Gregorio, became the guardian of King John II of Castile.^[149]

The Trastámara dynasty was safeguarded through diplomacy, counsel, and dynastic union. Diego López de Medrano's enactment of religion, obedience, and justice as foundational precepts of his diplomacy prefigured the doctrine codified in Tomás Fernández de Medrano's República Mista, where delegated authority, princely education, doctrinal counsel, and sacred kingship ensured peace and governance without civil or international war.^[11]

Centuries later, Diego Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros, as chaplain to Luis Méndez de Haro, valido (chief minister) of Philip IV enacted the same doctrinal precepts to restore peace between the Catholic princes of Europe.^[51] In the final pages of the Heroic and Flying Fame, Diego Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros claimed to have first conceived and defended the proposal for peace with France, which he transmitted to Luis Méndez de Haro, royal valido of Philip IV.^[51] This Medrano-Haro initiative led to the Treaty of the Pyrenees in 1659, securing peace through dynastic marriage and sovereign counsel.^[51] As with the Treaty of Bayonne, the Treaty of the Pyrenees aimed at peace through diplomacy and a dynastic alliance, this time between Louis XIV of France and Maria Theresa of Spain.^[150][151]

Philip II, known as Philip the Prudent in Spain, was King of Spain from 1556 until his death in 1598. Diego López de Medrano, Lord of San Gregorio, Alcaide of Aranjuez, a resident and regidor of Soria, who, as caballerizo mayor of the prince, accompanied the young Philip II throughout his ceremonial journey to Brussels in 1548 and 1549, overseeing his public elevation as heir to the Spanish Empire.^[152][153] The journey was designed to present Philip to the courts, cities, and powers of Europe as the heir to Charles V's vast empire.^[154] His brother Francisco de Medrano served as accountant and royal treasurer to Prince Charles, son of Philip II.^[152]

Diego was the namesake son of Diego López de Medrano y Vinuesa, High Steward to Empress Isabella of Portugal and the brother of García de Medrano y Vinuesa. As chief equerry, Diego López served as both the operational director and principal guardian of the young prince's public image and legitimacy during one of the most important political tours of the 16th century.^[152]

In the sixteenth and seventeenth century, the kings of Spain rewarded actions that benefited the broader public.^[27] Within the Spanish Empire, nobility was understood as a familial enterprise, where lineages could present their own service and merit to the crown, including their ancestors as hereditary continuity in service, religion, and virtue.^[27][155] In a letter to Philip II, Diego de Medrano, as the legitimate brother of Tomás Fernández de Medrano, proclaimed his merit and service to the king, bound to the precepts of religion, obedience, and justice, across the Mediterranean and Atlantic theaters.^[8][20][156] As a knight of Santiago, he served the king as a general of the Spanish, Neapolitan, and Portuguese galleys.^[155] In 1583 Captain Diego de Medrano achieved the first Atlantic crossing by galleys, commanding twelve ships of his own innovative design to the Azores for the Battle of Terceira, a feat Cabrera de Córdoba described as "a thing to admire and celebrate in the hearts of the Spanish."^[157]

By securing the beachhead, landing the tercios, and holding the coastal approaches, Diego de Medrano assured Spain's victory and paved the way for Portugal's final incorporation under Philip II, known as the Iberian Union.^[158] Through this union, Philip II of Spain became "Don Philippe, by the grace of God, King of Portugal and of the Algarves, on this side and beyond the sea, in Africa Lord of Guinea, and of the Conquest, Navigation, and Commerce of Ethiopia, Arabia, Persia, and India."^[28]

The improved ships played a decisive role in securing the surrender of Terceira and later Faial. In reward for his merit and service, the king granted him the habit of Santiago and appointed him to command the four galleys assigned to the Spanish Armada, where he would later become interim admiral of the fleet on their return back to Spain in 1588.^[159] Diego was informed by the Marqués de Santa Cruz, Álvaro de Bazán, that Philip II appointed him to take charge of the galleys on this expedition to England.^[155]

Diego de Medrano addressed Philip II on 7 February 1588 from Lisbon, and confirmed that the king "wishes for me to take charge of the galleys on this expedition," thanking him for the favor granted to him in this matter.^[155]

I beseech Your Majesty to grant me a favor in accordance with the quality of my person and honor, and may God preserve Your Majesty with increased life and greater realms and lordships, as Christendom needs and this vassal desires. Diego de Medrano.^[155]

Speaking directly to Philip II, Diego de Medrano listed his campaigns, his duty to guard the Strait of Gibraltar, and oversee the construction of the Port of Gibraltar, among many other acts of service, merit, obedience, and justice, precepts codified in his brother's República Mista.^[155]

Following the unification of the Portuguese Empire into the Spanish Crown, Philip II issued a proclamation in Portugal on 5 June 1595, as part of the preamble to the Ordenações Filipinas, that powerfully mirrored the doctrine later codified in the República Mista.^[28]

The Ordenações Filipinas were printed in 1603 and formally enacted under Philip III, just one year after the publication of the República Mista, making the preamble and the treatise alike a legal and chronological precursor to his decree.^[28] Philip II's preamble affirms that kings must reward merit over birth and uphold justice as the highest royal virtue.^[28]

On 5 June 1595, King Philip II of Spain upheld the precept of justice and mirrored Medrano's words of punishing the wicked and rewarding the good, declaring in the preamble of the Ordenações Filipinas:

And just as Justice is a virtue not for oneself but for others, since it benefits only those to whom it is given, by giving them what is theirs and enabling them to live well, the good through rewards, and the wicked through fear of punishment, from which peace and tranquility result in the Republic (for the punishment of the wicked is the preservation of the good), so must the good King act, since he was given by God not for himself nor for his own gain, but to govern his People well and benefit his subjects as if they were his own children.^[28]

By 1595, King Philip II of Spain had already aligned with the precepts later outlined in the República Mista, as Medrano himself served at court as his adviser, providing a doctrine in which legitimate kings upheld virtue, obedience, and justice, governing not for their own gain, but for the good of their people, treating their subjects as their own family, and upholding the laws and customs of the realm with equity.^[28]

The king, who embodied the polity, was expected to reward not only past services to his ancestors but also those actions that benefited the broader public, even if they did not directly serve him.^[27] In 1595, King Philip II of Spain declared in the Ordenações Filipinas:

As in a true mirror, [kings] must always examine and perfect themselves; for just as Justice consists in equality, and in giving to each his due with a just balance, so too must the good King be one and equal to all in repaying and rewarding each according to his merits.^[28]

Declaring justice to be "the principal virtue, and above all others the most excellent," Philip II of Spain confirmed in the Ordenações Filipinas that:

Kings must act not for their own gain, but for the good of their people, rewarding each according to merit and sustaining the Republic through a balance of arms and laws.^[28]

Tomás mirrors Philip II in the República Mista by citing Tacitus: "Neque quies gentium sine armis, neque arma sine stipendiis, neque stipendia sine tributis"–"There is no peace among nations without arms, no arms without pay, and no pay without taxes."^[1]

In their shared vision of kingship, justice, merit, and divine service are inseparable, revealing a 16th century royal codification of the Doctrine of Medrano seven years before the República Mista.^[28] The Ordenações Filipinas, along with the República Mista offer explicit details of the philosophical and political system operating in the Spanish Empire.^[95][64]

Illustrating the precepts of the doctrine, Tomás in the República Mista describes Philip II's reign as one marked by humility, religious reverence, and moral leadership:

King Philip II left countless examples of his devotion to religion and the reverence with which he regarded all its ministers. The pontiffs of his time bore great witness to this truth, and the immortal monuments of his magnificence and piety, left throughout Spain, Christendom, and the entire world, testify to it even to its remotest corners. Each year, with his forces and armadas for this purpose, he traversed the path of the sun, bringing the same blessing to all regions.^[7]

Tomás further affirms that a ruler is not merely a political figure but a moral and spiritual archetype:

The supreme magistrate, corresponding to his title, is a father to the kingdom or province he governs, a shepherd to the people, a preserver of peace, a protector of justice, and a guardian of innocence. To attempt to overthrow his rule, then, would seem unreasonable.^[7]

This understanding of royal office draws directly from doctrine latet codified in the República Mista, which holds that just kings are recognized by virtue rather than by bloodline. Obedience is owed even to rulers who fall short of moral excellence, not because of their personal merit but because all authority ultimately derives from divine ordinance. Tomás writes that the people naturally harbor contempt for tyrants and revere just princes, but when they fail to see in their ruler the image of God, they are easily led astray.

Scripture, he explains, teaches that:

Whether they act as they should or not, rulers wield power derived solely from the divine Majesty: the good are mirrors and examples of God's goodness, while the wicked are instruments of His wrath, punishing the people's wickedness.^[7]

He reinforces this by citing Isidore of Seville, Irascente Deo, talem rectorem populi suscipiunt, qualem pro peccato merentur:

When God is angered, the people receive such a ruler as they deserve for their sins. (Isidore, de Sententiis)^[7]

Tomás offers preventative counsel, affirming that "if such people would fix their eyes on the word of God, it would lead them far from such a course," for it teaches obedience not only to princes who govern justly but even to those who think only of their own desires, since whatever power they hold is derived from His Divine Majesty.^[1]

In this formulation, the Doctrine of Medrano presents a theological realism: rulers are appointed according to divine justice, whether as blessings or as punishments. Good kings mirror God's goodness; wicked ones reflect the people's corruption. This moral causality reinforces Tomás's warning that disobedience to legitimate authority is a spiritual error unless it defends divine order itself.^[7]

He cites Emperor Tiberius, whose long reign, despite its promise, descended into disgrace:

Latin: "Post tantam rerum experientiam, diu dominationis convulsus, commutatus, postremo in scelera simul ac dedecora prorupuit"

English: After so much experience of things, disturbed by the long exercise of rule, he fell at last into crimes and disgrace. (Tacitus)^[7]

For Medrano, rulers serve as instruments of divine instruction, either as models of virtue or as scourges of judgment. The Doctrine of Medrano affirms that the true test of a republic lies not only in the actions of its kings but in the moral and spiritual state of its people.^[7]

The example of faith set by rulers becomes a law and model for their subjects, fostering a society rooted in love and charity.^[7] Medrano affirmed this as the surest path to preserving and fortifying their kingdoms and empires.^[7] Tomás declares:

All monarchies, no matter how great, are mortal. In obedience and reverence, they must recognize that they, too, are His creatures, subject to His laws and divine will, just like everyone else.^[52]

Philip II expressed the same awareness in Madrid on 29 November 1578:

I don't know if they think I'm made of iron or stone. The truth is, they need to see that I am mortal, like everyone else.^[160][161]

For Philip II and his adviser Tomás, the doctrine binding kings to divine law in life was ritually affirmed in death. Through this understanding, mortality became a cornerstone of spiritual humility and royal governance in the Spanish monarchy.^[7]

Philip II's grasp of this doctrine, later codified in the República Mista, developed from an early age through his close proximity to virtuous courtiers, including the Medrano family: Tomás Fernández de Medrano, his trusted adviser who lived with him at court; Diego López de Medrano y Vinuesa, High Steward to his mother, Empress Isabella of Portugal (1530–1539); and the steward's son, also named Diego López de Medrano, who served as Philip II's chief equerry.^[152]

Philip II died at El Escorial on 13 September 1598. At his funeral in Madrid, Tomás Fernández de Medrano delivered the official funeral oration titled "The Funeral Oration at the obsequies of Philip II," extolling the monarch's virtues in a singular act of trust that affirmed the family's place as a voice of imperial memory and conscience.^[17]

The Florentine funeral obsequies reinforced this role through large canvases depicting formative episodes from Philip's youth, including "Philip's Departure for Flanders from Barcelona" and "Philip Welcomed by the Doge of Genoa" in 1548.^[162] The meeting with the Doge was remembered in Tuscany as the occasion when the young Prince Francesco de' Medici greeted Philip on his first Italian visit, and the subject itself reappeared in the funeral decor for Francesco I.^[163] Scholars have suggested that this canvas, like others, may have been reused for Philip II's own esequie.^[164]

By staging these scenes alongside the rites, the obsequies bookended Philip's reign. They recalled his early journey to Italy in 1548, undertaken with Diego López de Medrano, his chief equerry (caballerizo mayor), and concluded with Tomás Fernández de Medrano's final oration.^[17] Together these elements situated the service of the Medrano family within the visual and ceremonial heart of dynastic memory and imperial continuity.^[17]

After the death of Philip II of Spain, his son Philip III ascended to the throne and inherited not only the Spanish Empire but also a religious military order. Philip III inherited, with Apostolic authority, the Grandmastership of the Order of Santiago, continuing the dual legacy of kingship and religious-military authority. Under Philip III, the court increasingly operated as a codified system of delegated governance, shaped by the rise of his valido, Francisco de Sandoval y Rojas, 1st Duke of Lerma, himself a knight of Santiago. This political environment provided one of the clearest historical stages for delegated authority to arise as moral, political, and theological jurisdiction under God, codified by Tomás Fernández de Medrano in his República Mista. Its precepts of legitimate delegation and virtuous rule were further affirmed through the reform of the statutes of Santiago, carried out by García de Medrano y Castejón and ratified by Philip III with Apostolic authority, solidifying the Doctrine of Medrano as the guiding framework of royal and knightly governance across the Spanish Empire.^[52]

By the late sixteenth century, the Medrano family and the etymological root medrar had become embedded within the royal court as a recognized code of doctrine, identifying jurisdiction by proximity to rulers, earned through service, virtue, and delegated authority.^[165] As Francisco Javier Fortún Pérez de Ciriza notes, such arrangements reflected circuits of delegated power, patronage, and doctrine that foreshadowed the later Habsburg model of the valido (royal favourite).^[165] In early modern Spain, status and influence increasingly depended on proximity to the sovereign, court patronage, and administrative office rather than territorial rule.^[166] As Ángel Campos-Perales observes, medrar became the operative verb of court society, shaping both careers and life cycles through visibility, favor, and proximity.^[12]

Within this structure, the knights of Santiago, including the Duke of Lerma, were given a renewed form of legitimacy and delegated authority through the reforms of the Order of Santiago by García de Medrano y Castejón, radiating from God to the Church, then to the king and his valido, down to the kings ministers, magistrates, ecclesiastics, and subjects.^[22] All knights of Santiago across the empire were required by law to uphold the legal reform of Medrano.^[22] This included his son García de Medrano y Álvarez de los Ríos, their relatives, Antonio Vélaz de Medrano y Hurtado de Mendoza, Pedro Vélaz de Medrano, Antonio Vélaz de Medrano, and all other knights of Santiago, especially knights holding offices across the Empire.^[22]

One of the clearest embodiments of royal delegation under Philip II, and later the valido under Philip III, was Alonso Molina de Medrano (1550–1616), a knight of Santiago and commander of Benazusa and Villafranca in the Supreme Councils and Senates of the Indies and Castile, and patron of the main chapel of San Francisco in Vélez-Málaga.^[127] A protégé of Francisco de Sandoval, Duke of Lerma and the first valido, Alonso advanced (medrar) from professor at the University of Seville and Inquisitor in Zaragoza and Córdoba to Councilor of the Indies (1592), first Chamberlain of the Chamber of the Indies (1600), Councilor of Castile (1608–1616), and member of the Board of Finance for the Indies and Portugal.^[167][168]

Acting under Lerma's delegated authority and as a knight of Santiago, he administered precepts and mechanisms of governance that combined inquisitorial jurisdiction, colonial administration, and royal finance.^[169] His advancement illustrates how García de Medrano's statute codifies delegated authority and transforms the Order's service into institutionalized trust, providing the knights a legal and virtuous form of advancement (medrar) through delegated and divine jurisdiction under God, united by the divine precepts of religion, obedience, and justice under binding Apostolic and Royal law.^[127]

García de Medrano y Castejón, jurist and knight of the Order of Santiago, served as Alcalde del Crimen in the Chancery of Granada, councilor of the Royal Council of Castile, member of the Royal Council of Justice, and Minister of the Council of the Orders.^[21] In these roles, he carried forward the doctrine codified in the República Mista and upheld the foundational precepts of religion, obedience, and justice through the reform of the statutes and laws governing Spain's principal military order: the Order of Santiago.^[22]

Bachelor Juan Fernández de la Gama provides a detailed description of the doctrine that defined the reign of the Catholic Monarchs. By the authority of King Fernando and Queen Isabel, perpetual administrators of the Order of Santiago through Apostolic grant, he compiled the statutes of the Order prior to García's extensive reform in the seventeenth century.^[22] According to Gama, across their kingdoms, Isabel and Ferdinand aided widows and orphans, rewarded merit, and ennobled successors of knights and loyal servants. They responded to grave affairs with subtlety and temperance. Gama affirmed the Catholic monarchs read and practiced the sciences and upheld a mirror of truth and virtue.^[22]

As zealous guardians of justice and virtue, the Catholic monarchs summoned wise knights and the most learned professors, elevating them through dignities, captaincies, offices, rewards, and gifts. In this way, they staffed their councils with prudent jurists and scholars, and their armies with valiant captains who subdued their enemies.^[22]

"Justice is administered with equal balance in their kingdoms. And they have given rule and form for good and profitable and honest living, commanding to be made with very great deliberation and agreement many laws and pragmatics, as supreme lords, without recognizing superior in temporal matters in their kingdoms. For among all the virtues worthy of perpetual memory that all their subjects ought to extol, it must be noted that the occupation of wars and many arduous affairs has never separated nor set aside all attention and devotion to the divine offices, preachings, and holy doctrine."^[22]

Gama affirms that, having received by Apostolic authority the administration of this holy military Order, Their Highnesses reformed and ordered it in many respects, striving above all to restore it to its original beginning and foundation, and "with long and prosperous days of Their Highnesses, honor and growth of this holy Order."

Preserved in García de Medrano's 1605 reform of the Order of Santiago, a prologue by Henry, Duke of Villena (1400–1445), Prince of Aragon and Sicily and General Master of the Order, delivered at a Chapter held in the Convent of Uclés, declares that kings, princes, and all other lords prosper (medrar) by leaving doctrine and instruction for successors to act and work:

"It is evident and known that statutes, ordinances, and laws were found for the rule and governance of peoples, restraint of vices, evils, and crimes, punishment of the erring and delinquent, encouragement and example of the well-living, doctrine and instruction of the simple and ignorant, preservation and conservation of virtues, for the exercise and execution of justice, which through observance of them flourishes, and adorned with them emperors, kings, princes, and all other lords had noble invention, establishing laws and ordinances to govern and rule their peoples well; and by that their memory endures perpetually, and not only in their times did they prosper, but they also left doctrine and instruction for successors to act and work thus, responding and sharing in the good predecessors of so holy and meritorious inventors."^[22]

Following the incorporation of the military orders into direct royal administration under the Catholic Monarchs and Charles V, Aranjuez functioned as the juridical and institutional center through which reforms of Santiago were executed.^[170][171] García's first cousin, Diego López de Medrano, served as caballerizo mayor to prince philip (Philip II) and alcaide of the castle of Aranjuez, the seat of the Mesa Maestra, the Order's governing body since the thirteenth century.^[172][170] Diego's great-grandfather Diego López de Medrano fought and died for Queen Isabel and King Ferdinand in the siege of Malaga (1487).^[152]

García de Medrano's doctrinal reform was embedded within a longstanding Medrano presence at the administrative core of the Order of Santiago.^[152][22] By decree of Philip III of Spain, García de Medrano authored two foundational legal works: The rule and establishment of the knighthood of Santiago of the Sword, with the history of its origin and principle thereof (1601), reprinted in Valladolid in 1603 and reissued in Madrid in 1627;^[173] and Compilation of the Chapter Laws of the Order of Knighthood of Santiago of the Sword, Compiled and arranged by Licenciado Don García de Medrano, of the Royal Council of Justice, published posthumously in 1605 in Madrid.^[21][152] The latter work systematized the statutes, privileges, ceremonies, and disciplinary structure of the Order of Santiago, following the legal framework of the earlier compilation by Fernández de la Gama.^[173] This reform was completed posthumously in 1605, when Philip III, acting by royal decree and Apostolic authority, ordered their compilation and formal confirmation of Medrano's doctrinal reform.^[22]

In 1605, Philip III compiled and published García de Medrano's Compilation of the Chapter Laws of the Order of Knighthood of Santiago of the Sword, printed in Valladolid by Luys Sánchez. This publication formed part of a broader reform program between 1603 and 1609 updating the legal codes of Santiago, Calatrava, and Alcántara.^[174]

García de Medrano preserved the spiritual and temporal legal titles of the Order, omitting only statutes concerning religious minorities that had been legally abolished. The compilation incorporated statutes approved from the Chapter of Mérida (1387) through Écija-Seville (1501–1502), unifying centuries of law under a codified doctrine of governance.^[173]

In compliance with the Chapter's mandate, García de Medrano reviewed and revised the laws of the Order:

with great care and diligence, removing those that were no longer necessary, and in others, according to the changing times, increased the penalties for offenders.^[22]

García carried out this work as a councilor and administrator of the legal history, governance, and admissions of the royal military orders.^[175]

Philip III ratified the reform of Medrano as royal law and explained that its purpose was to preserve the Orders and strive for their growth (medrar) in religion and virtue:

To maintain as we do in their administration, care of the spiritual and temporal; and being as they are Religious Orders... it is of greater service to our Lord to preserve them in their good state and strive for them to grow in virtue and religion.^[22]

The decree ordered the observance of the corrected Leyes Capitulares throughout the kingdom and was issued in Valladolid on 15 January 1605, authenticated by Francisco González de Heredia and verified by Gregorio de Tapia on 4 February.^[22]

With Apostolic and Royal authority, Philip III concluded:

And so that all may know the intent and authority behind it: I confirm and approve all the capitular laws in this volume, whether newly made or amended by the General Chapter, and I command all Priors, Commanders, Treces, governors, magistrates, and good men of the towns of the Order to observe and execute them precisely as written, including all corrections and declarations entered therein. My Council of the Orders shall ensure their fulfillment and enforce them in judgment.^[22]

The doctrinal reforms, as statutory law, integrated religion, obedience, justice, merit, and virtue into the institutional governance of the Order of Santiago and reinforced the República Mista (1602), Philip's kingship, and delegated royal authority within the Spanish monarchy.^[22]

The doctrine codified in the República Mista was strengthened in the core of the Spanish Empire's educational and governmental institutions by García de Medrano y Álvarez de los Ríos, knight of the Order of Santiago, who served as Minister of Finance and Justice, Minister of the Council of the Indies, Councilor of the Councils of Castile, the Indies, Inquisition, and the Royal Chamber.^[73] He carried out his doctrinal vocation as the son of García de Medrano y Castejón, the reformer of Santiago. He served as perpetual regidor of Soria, procurator in the Cortes, crime prosecutor of the Royal Audiencia and Chancery of Valladolid, auditor of Valladolid, auditor of the Council of Finance and of the Council of the Indies, regent of the kingdoms of Navarre and of Seville, doctor of Canons, and professor at the University of Salamanca, where he presided over the Hall of Mayors of Castile.^[73]

Through the 1666 royal reform of the Colegio Mayor de San Ildefonso, the Doctrine of Medrano shaped Spain's prestigious training ground for future statesmen.^[68][176] Enacted by Charles II of Spain on 4 November 1666 following a decree issued on 27 August 1665 by Philip IV of Spain, the reform was designed and implemented by García de Medrano y Álvarez de los Ríos, a senior jurist of the Royal Council of Castile and the son of García de Medrano y Castejón, reformer of the Order of Santiago. García's statutes addressed absenteeism, corruption, and moral decline with a comprehensive code regulating elections, lectures, residence, and governance.^[177] His reform at the Colegio Mayor de San Ildefonso corrected some of the university's traditional autonomy, long supported by the Catholic Church, by asserting Crown control over appointments and admissions, traditionally dominated by the individual interests of the clergy and local elites. García's doctrinal reform in 1666 sat at the intersection of delegated authority, royal power, legal rigor, and educational governance in seventeenth-century Spain.^[178]

Between 1663 and 1668, as Visitador General by royal commission, García unified the colleges of Tuy, Vizcaínos, and Verdes under uniform constitutions.^[179] Acting as heir and patron of their founders, García de Medrano transformed fragmented noble foundations into a unified system of merit-based fellowships.^[179] The final incorporation of the unified Verdes college into the Colegio de Santa Catalina de los Medrano in 1668 by García de Medrano solidified his family's lasting role in educational governance and doctrinal stewardship.^[179] This consolidation, approved by the Royal Council of Castile, institutionalized García's reforms and unification, enabling students to advance (medrar) through learning, service, and lineage, within a doctrine of royal and ecclesiastical delegation and oversight.^[179]

The 1666 Royal Reform of the Colegio Mayor de San Ildefonso was not limited to administrative regulation; it reconstituted the institution within a defined jurisdiction of delegated authority consistent with the doctrine codified in the República Mista.^[68] Medrano placed collegiate governance explicitly under delegated authority rather than inherited ecclesiastical autonomy.^[180] Authority proceeded from the Crown through legally constituted visitation and statute, while remaining constrained by foundational constitutions, religious obligation, and the maintenance of justice.^[180] This established a durable constitutional order in which institutional advancement (medrar) was effected through regulated oversight. The 1688 Consultation later confirmed the stability of this settlement, distinguishing legitimate royal delegation from administrative excess and thereby safeguarding both the prerogatives of the Crown and the juridical integrity of the College.^[180]

Sebastián Fernández de Medrano, master of mathematics for the king in the states of Flanders, played a key role in refining and codifying the Doctrine of Medrano in his role as the sole director of the Royal Military and Mathematics Academy of Brussels from 1675 to 1705.^[181] Founded in 1675 at the request of the 9th Duke of Villahermosa, governor and captain general of the Spanish Netherlands, Medrano's academy is widely regarded as the first modern military and mathematical institution in Europe.^[69] He was supported by the kings delegates, such as Captain General and Governor of the Spanish Netherlands, Francisco Antonio de Agurto y Salcedo Medrano, 1st Marquess of Gastañaga,^[181] and Antonio Vélaz de Medrano, 1st Marquess of Tabuérniga, Governor of Nieuwpoort, the last defense linked to a chain of forts, dunes, and canals built to stop France from walking into Brussels, headquarters of the Academy.^[93]

The 9th Duke of Villahermosa, as captain general and governor of the Spanish Netherlands, reported to Charles II that Sebastián Fernández de Medrano's instruction had advanced (medraron) Spain's military capacity to the point that foreign engineers and artisans were no longer required:

In the limited time that the military have attended, who with the experience previously acquired and the theory of mathematics, have advanced in such a way that it has been achieved that today Your Majesty no longer needs to rely on engineers and artisans from other nations, which carries so much risk of confidence, having expert Spaniards in these matters^[182]

The 9th Duke explains to the king that many have become very proficient in the understanding of the arts that make a soldier capable in his profession, "the proof of having already sent some engineers to other armies," including England and the Holy Roman Empire.^[182]

Medrano observed that the importance of the Academy became evident very quickly, as it produced numerous skilled experts in military architecture, serving not only the dominions of His Majesty but also the territories of the Princes of the League, who repeatedly sought their services.^[182]

The Academy's achievements and foreign reliance on his graduates were the outcome of a structured and codified system, which Medrano explicitly defined and personally taught his students as a doctrine:

Moreover, to facilitate the understanding of this doctrine for the dedicated, it was decided to publish various books on all aspects of the Mathematical Disciplines relevant to this profession, such as Geography or World Description, Geometry, Fortification, Squadron Formation, Artifices of Fire, and the usage and practice of Artillery and Mortars, all of which were lacking in our language.^[182]

Among these, particular emphasis was placed on arithmetic, geometry, and fortification, as these fields were closely interrelated and fundamental to military science.^[183] Graduates of the Academy were not only deployed throughout Europe but also sent to colonial cities in the Americas, where they contributed to the construction and defense of imperial strongholds.^[183]

In 1694, a letter to Charles II by Maximilian II Emanuel requested recognition and royal favor of Sebastián Fernández de Medrano's service, confirming that the king is aware of his merit through the reports of the kings generals and the very effects "that his ingenuity and application have benefited the Royal service."^[182] Although the Treaty of The Hague (1698) named Maximillian II's son Joseph Ferdinand as heir, Charles II rejected the treaty and designated him independently and legally through a legitimate Spanish will. On 14 November 1698, Charles II issued his will naming Joseph Ferdinand, Electoral Prince of Bavaria, heir to an independent and undivided Spanish Empire.^[184] Joseph Ferdinand was grandchild of Emperor Leopold I and of Margaret Theresa, Charles II's sister.^[185]

In 1696, Sebastián Fernández de Medrano composed a sonnet of dedication, portraying the prince as a sovereign in doctrinal formation two years prior to the will of Charles II. He offered the treatise as a gift for the rightful successor to the Spanish Empire:

To the Most Serene Lord Joseph Ferdinand, Electoral Prince of Bavaria, a gift such as this my pen dares to offer. It is from Pallas, this burning Architecture, O Prince, Mars himself safeguards it. The Region is vast and far-reaching, to raise up Bavaria to such height, that the whole world may find it without peer.^[116]

Joseph Ferdinand's formation by doctrine represents a formal transmission of Medrano led instruction at the highest level of dynastic succession prior to the War of the Spanish Succession.^[116] However, Joseph died of smallpox on 6 February 1699 at the age of six, leaving the future of the Empire unresolved until Charles II chose his great-nephew, the future Philip V of Spain.^[186]

The Bourbon succession of Philip V was accompanied by the education of his sons, the Bourbon princes, under the personal direction of Giovanni Antonio Medrano (Juan Fernández de Medrano), who joined the regiment of Sebastián's protégé Jorge Próspero de Verboom in his early career.^[13] This unbroken chain led directly to Giovanni educating Charles III, Ferdinand VI, and their princely brothers in the Doctrine of Medrano, including the Medrano curriculum first codified by Sebastián in Brussels.^[13] This continuous transmission of doctrine through Giovanni prepared the Bourbon princes for sacred kingship in Naples, Sicily, and the Spanish Empire.^[187]

In 1700, Sebastián Fernández de Medrano dedicated El architecto perfecto en el arte militar to Luis Francisco de la Cerda, 9th Duke of Medinaceli, commander of the Order of Santiago; Chamberman of the Chamber to Charles II and Philip V; tutor of the Prince of Asturias (future Louis I) in 1709.^[65][188]

In the dedication, Sebastián Fernández de Medrano invoked noble patronage as a guarantor of doctrinal legitimacy:

From the moment I took up the pen, I resolved to expand anew with fresh instructions the doctrine which is the subject of the contents of this volume, which comes to light under the protection of the sacred authority of Your Excellency, so that with such privilege it might run safely from all censure.^[65]

In 1723, Charles VI, Holy Roman Emperor granted exclusive publishing rights to Las Obras de Medrano in the Spanish Netherlands, explicitly naming Medrano and affirming the authority and continuity of his codifications across imperial institutions.^[189][190]

Sebastián Fernández de Medrano's works became the official military doctrine of Spain and the Spanish Netherlands.^[191] Preserving this legacy of Brussels for posterity, the Spanish historian, Serafín María de Sotto, 3rd Count of Clonard, wrote:

The Spanish can rightly claim the glory of having advanced in the science of war more than the rest of cultured Europe.^[192]

Medrano personally designed the curriculum for Barcelona's new academy which shaped later royal academies at Oran and Ceuta,^[193] directly influencing the early organization of the Spanish Corps of Engineers in 1711 established by his protégé Jorge Próspero de Verboom, 1st Marquess of Verboom,^[194][191] and later the Spanish Civil Engineers Corps established in 1835 by Diego de Medrano y Treviño, Minister of the Interior of Spain.^[195] Following the Battle of Ramillies (1706), the academy ceased operations but continued in the next generation of military academies.^[191]

One of the most significant cultural expressions of the Doctrone of Medrano was the Medrano Academy of Poetry in Madrid (1616–1622) founded and presided over by Sebastián Francisco de Medrano, priest, chief chaplain and chief almoner of San Pedro el Real in Madrid, protonotary apostolic, apostolic judge, chaplain and treasurer for Gómez Suárez de Figueroa, III Duke of Feria.^[115][196] He was celebrated by contemporaries and hailed by Alonso de Castillo Solórzano as "the prince of the most renowned Academy Madrid ever had."^[115]

In 1631, Solórzano confirmed Sebastián Francisco de Medrano's doctrinal career in the introductory to the Favors of the Muses, writing:

His works were well-received and applauded by many distinguished audiences, including one session attended publicly by Their Majesties and the most illustrious figures of Spain, both in lineage and intellect. These early achievements prepared him for a literary career, creating works that blend erudition, doctrine, devotion, and example.^[115]

Dr. Sebastián Francisco de Medrano gathered many of the most prominent literary figures of the Spanish Golden Age in his poetic academy, including Lope de Vega, Francisco de Quevedo, Luis de Góngora, Pedro Calderón de la Barca, and Tirso de Molina, Juan de Amescua, Guillén de Castro y Bellvis, Luis Velez de Guevara, Juan de Alarcon, and Diego Jimenez de Enciso, Gaspar de Avila, Diego de Villegas y Quevedo, Rodrigo de Gerera, and Licentiate Luis Quiñones de Benavente, along with many others.^[115] Medrano even praises Francisco de Borja y Aragón, prince of Squillace and a member of the Medrano Academy of Poetry, "for whom heaven not only made him illustrious in blood but also equaled his genius," describing him as outstanding "in all sciences and faculties."^[115]

Sebastián Francisco de Medrano was appointed commissioner of the Spanish Inquisition, as the official censor of comedias in the Spanish Empire.^[115] To transmit and perform the approved comedias, figures such as Juan de Morales Medrano performed and wrote them as an author of comedias and as a theatrical empresario, although he was already active as an actor by 1595.^[197][198] Married to the famous actress Jusepa Vaca, known as la Gallarda, Morales Medrano directed his own company almost continuously from 1601 to 1631 and became one of the most recognized theatrical figures of the early seventeenth century.^[199][198] Contemporary accounts highlight how the company's performances, led by Morales Medrano and his wife Vaca from 1602 to 1628, frequently sold-out corrals for plays featuring her in starring roles.^[200] Their troupe performed for the Prince of Wales and appeared in Corpus Christi celebrations sixteen times from 1604 onward across Seville, Madrid, Toledo, Medina de Rioseco and Valencia, performing in major urban centres.^[201][198]

The Apologético a favor de don Luis de Góngora (1662) written by Juan de Espinosa Medrano, was the first Apologético composed in the Americas and the first transatlantic defense of Luis de Góngora, a member of the Medrano Academy of Poetry in Madrid, as both a literary authority of the Doctrine of Medrano and a symbol of Andean-Spanish nobility.^[202] In the Apologético, Espinosa Medrano united scholastic rigor with baroque literary culture, drawing on classical and modern sources including Tertullian, Apuleius, Saint Jerome, Galileo Galilei, and Justus Lipsius.^[131]

Espinosa Medrano, chaplain to Luis Méndez de Haro, valido (chief minister) of Philip IV, dedicated his Apologético to him, and provides a philosophical and historical illustration of the office itself:

"Alexander would not be rightly called the Great, if he lacked the sweet confidence of his Hephaestion... nor would Darius have gained so much fame... as from the loyal fidelity of his Zopyrus.... to silence all eloquence, it is enough to know that only Royal favor can rightly name such praises."^[131]

Espinosa Medrano's counterpart, Diego Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros, lord of Valdeosera, chaplain to the valido, named Aristotle, Euclid, and Apelles, although with brushes "in this glory Apelles advanced" (medrar), Lysippus, Xenophon, Plutarch, and Maecenas, to determine that none succeeded at being a privanza (valido) more than Luis Méndez de Haro for the king.^[51]

Diego evaluates the chief minister (valido) by applying the standard of advancement (medrar), presenting his doctrinal affirmation that Luis Méndez de Haro fulfilled the proper end of political authority:

Did he not introduce peace into Christendom, with the intent that the exploits of war should come only to frighten depraved heresy, and dazzled paganism, against whom with proper justification the most Catholics and Christian heroes must always be employed?^[51]

Diego, as his chaplain, observed how, with confederate and allied princes, Luis did not always show himself submissive and benign; "because boldness and improvement" (medrar) give greater credit to actions, more than friendly courtesy or untreatable harshness, when credit or accident "does not ask for the remedies of valiant reason."^[51]

"Justice did not find him unequal; the necessities of war did not find him unprompt; the afflictions of his Prince did not find him unrecognized, affectionate, and vigilant."^[51]

According to his chaplain Diego Fernández de Medrano, the kingdoms of Spain did not see Haro as merely a passive observer, instead he is described as someone who actively took on their burdens, contributed to the full extent of his power, and worked to secure peace so that their hardships could be more effectively resolved. Diego asks the reader to remember that all the kingdoms of Spain place the hopes of their reliefs "in the prudence and justification of this valido," by reward of having shown himself "so loyal and prompt in necessities and straits."^[51]

The Medrano chaplaincies and treatises spanning from Spain to the Americas became legal, religious, and formal transmissions of spiritual authority exercised by Tomás's great-nephew Diego Fernández de Medrano alongside Juan de Espinosa Medrano under the valido of Philip IV. Their dual role as chaplains to the valido practiced the union of conscience and counsel in royal service to the king, with ecclesiastics in the councils of princes for the service of God, codified decades earlier by Tomás in the República Mista.^[51]

The author of the República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano, actively experienced the French Wars of Religion from 1591 to 1598.^[8] As Secretary of State and War to the Duke of Savoy, Medrano, with the support of the King of Spain, backed the Catholic Guise and Montmorency families against the Calvanist faction led by Henry IV of France, the House of Condé, and Jeanne d'Albret, Queen of Navarre.^[8] Medrano personally advised the Duke of Savoy in crafting a coordinated military and doctrinal response to the protestant rebellion in France.^[8]

In 1591, the urgency of the situation in Provence had compelled the Duke of Savoy to send Medrano, his secretary of state and war, to court. The Duke of Savoy described Tomás Fernández de Medrano as "a person through whose hands everything has passed and who infinitely desires the service of Your Majesty," and instructed that, to find a resolution with Medrano, the king could trust in his delegated authority:

"whatever he proposes... it will be my pleasure for you to give him the same credit as you would to my own person."^[8]

Two years after Tomás entered the campaign, in 1593, Henry IV, previously protestant, renounced Calvinism and converted to Catholicism to secure the unity of the French crown.^[203] The conflict reached formal resolution in 1598 when Henry IV, now a Catholic king, issued the Edict of Nantes, granting defined liberties to the Huguenots while maintaining the juridical supremacy of Catholic legitimacy.^[203]

Though the phrase "Paris is well worth a Mass" may be apocryphal, the act affirmed a political theology of peace, unity, and legitimacy through sacramental kingship.^[204] Henry IV's coronation at Chartres on 27 February 1594, and papal absolution on 17 September 1595 completed the juridical and ecclesial recognition of his sovereign authority.^[205] Though some Protestant allies were alienated, the conversion consolidated Catholic loyalty and stabilized the French monarchy.^[205]

In his República Mista, Medrano identified the disorders of the previous French reign as rooted in the arbitrary elevation of unworthy individuals under Henry III:

One of the causes of ruin in France under Henry III, as a modern author claims, was that people sprang up like mushrooms, elevated overnight to great dignities without the experience, age, or virtues possessed by those born and bred for such roles... Those who occupy positions without merit bring envy upon themselves and disrepute upon their patron.

He drew from Euripides to compare such honors to golden wings that appear to elevate but instead weigh down the unworthy, and continued:

Qui dicunt impio justus est... Maledicent eis populi, et detestabuntur eos tribus. (The people and nations curse those who say to the wicked, "You are just.")

For Medrano, rulers who fail to reward merit or punish injustice become complicit in wrongdoing. Political legitimacy, he taught, depends on delegated authority and virtuous rule aligned with divine and natural precepts.^[7]

Two years after Tomás Fernández de Medrano published the República Mista (1602), Pierre Lostal, vice-chancellor of Navarre under Henry III of Navarre (Henry IV of France), published Le Soldat Navarros (1604) for a restored Catholic kingdom. Addressed to the king, the work portrayed the monarch as the restraining force against ambition and disorder, grounding royal authority in four cardinal precepts: justice, prudence, magnanimity, and temperance.^[206]

In 1602, the República Mista had already strengthened Madrid-Rome ties and asserted Philip III's kingship as obedient to God, reinforcing his religious legitimacy before the papacy.^[43] Medrano had previously served under Enrique de Guzmán, 2nd Count of Olivares, during his ambassadorship to the Holy See from 1582 to 1591. Medrano remained in Rome throughout this period as part of the Spanish embassy.^[8] In 1605, Tomás Fernández de Medrano, under direct papal authority of Pope Paul V, reaffirmed the legal and spiritual foundations of the Orders of St. John.^[114] Tomás, granted the habit of St. John personally by Pope Clement VIII in 1593, was commissioned by Pope Paul V to produce a legal brief confirming the Order of Saint John's privileges, printed in Rome in 1605 and praised by King Philip III.^[114]

Military orders acted as intermediaries in disputes among European powers, using their religious authority and political neutrality to facilitate negotiations and promote peace.^[207] as a Knight of St. John, Tomás's commission occurred during the escalating conflict between Paul V and the Republic of Venice, whose laws restricting ecclesiastical property and jurisdiction provoked a major diplomatic crisis.^[208] After Venice imprisoned two clerics and refused to yield them to Church courts, Paul V viewed this as a direct violation of canon law. His interdict on Venice in 1606 drew Spain and France into the dispute, and the privileges of religious orders became a central point of contention.^[208] Philip III supported the Papacy against Venice, raising an army of 26,000.^[209] Mediation by Henry IV of France resolved the crisis in 1607, reaffirming that no citizen was exempt from ordinary legal process while preserving the essential rights of the church.^[208][210]

Military orders such as the Order of St. John and the Order of Santiago played an important role in shaping the medieval European economy. Through land grants, donations, and alliances with monarchs and noble families, these institutions accumulated wealth and property for the defense of Christendom.^[207] The Knights of St. John, under the authority of the Pope, held large estates throughout Europe and the Mediterranean, deriving income from agriculture, commerce, and rents.^[207] Their fortified bases on Rhodes and later Malta allowed them to defend key maritime routes and to control much of the trade flowing from the eastern Mediterranean, strengthening their economic and political influence.^[207] These Orders helped shape the balance of power in medieval Europe and left a lasting impact on its political development.^[207]

Drawing upon Saint Isidore of Seville, Tomás affirmed that rulers sin when they entrust governance to corrupt ministers. He drew a clear moral parallel: as the people are at fault for enduring wicked rulers, rulers are equally at fault for empowering unworthy officials (Ad delictum pertinet Principum, qui pranos indices contra voluntatem Dei populi fidelibus praeficiunt).^[11]

Since God is the ultimate author of justice, continually demonstrating it in us through such clear signs, we should neither disregard nor violate it. Those entrusted with administering justice or appointing others to this role must select people who are fit for such weighty responsibilities, learned and exemplars of good conduct. For otherwise, the great and supreme Judge will closely scrutinize the grievances done to the innocent, the abuses, and the scandals caused by the ignorant, bringing ruin upon countless families. Ad delictum pertinet Principum, qui pranos indices contra voluntatem Dei populi fidelibus praeficiunt: "The fault lies with the rulers who, against God's will, place corrupt judges over the faithful." Just as it is the people's sin to have unworthy rulers, so too is it the ruler's sin to have unjust ministers. Who doubts, says St. Isidore, that a ruler commits a sin when he appoints a corrupt shepherd to his flock? For just as it is a transgression of the people to have wicked rulers, so it is equally a transgression of the ruler to appoint unworthy ministers. And what of those offices that have been sold?^[11]

He reserved his strongest condemnation for the sale of secular and ecclesiastical offices. This practice, he explains, allowed unworthy men to buy their way into power, eroding the moral foundations of the republic and weakening the integrity of both Church and Crown.^[1]

"From this, we can infer what the Sorbonne of Paris advised King Francis II regarding the need for reform in his kingdom. They argued that the gravest injustices stemmed from the sale of secular and ecclesiastical offices, often to unworthy men, as if these roles were simple merchandise. Such corruption, they stated, had led to the rise of new religious factions and widespread abuses. By selling justice, the most sacred foundation of the world, the republic, the blood of the subjects, and the very laws themselves were betrayed. This practice destroyed hope and stripped honor, virtue, wisdom, piety, and religion of their rightful rewards."^[1]

In such an environment, merchants and commoners could purchase honors once reserved for the virtuous and noble. Once in office, these officials often recouped their investment through bribery, influence-peddling, and extortion. Tomás warned that this cycle institutionalized impiety and ignorance and violated both civil and canonical law, as well as the customs of honorable monarchs.^[1]

"They opened the door to robbery, extortion, greed, ignorance, impiety, and ultimately to all manner of vice and wickedness. Through this, commoners, who had gained wealth through multiple trades, could buy titles and honors that only the virtuous and noble had previously earned through merit. And afterward, finding themselves financially depleted, they sought to recover their expenses by selling, bit by bit, what they had purchased in bulk, directly contradicting the civil and canonical laws that had formed the foundation of the royal statutes and venerable customs upheld by the king's ancestors."^[1]

He then cited Emperor Alexander Severus, whose maxim encapsulated the logic of corruption:

Vendat necesse est, qui emit: "He who buys must inevitably sell."^[11]

Citing the Sorbonne's counsel to King Francis II, Medrano warned that selling offices had precipitated widespread injustice. The Parisian faculty had condemned this practice for turning virtue into a commodity and for sowing religious division and civil disorder. Tomás echoed their warning, framing it as a betrayal of law, justice, and honor.^[1]

"It was precisely this kind of corruption that brought ruin to the republic of Sparta and to other once-thriving kingdoms, a fate that France, above all, should take care to avoid."^[1]

The warning addressed to the Kingdom of France by Tomás Fernández de Medrano, secretary of state and war to the Dukes of Savoy, proved profoundly relevant under Louis XIV and later in Spain during the Bourbon era and the eventual French Revolution. The same abuses he condemned, including the sale of offices, the elevation of the unworthy, and the corruption of justice for profit, appeared in both France and Spain. By the 18th century, widespread opposition to venality and fiscal exploitation in Spain and the Americas confirmed the warnings Tomás made, which held that kingdoms fall into disorder whenever merit yields to ambition and justice is treated as merchandise.^[211]

This was explicitly condemned by Jaime Vélaz de Medrano y Barros, III Marquess of Tabuérniga de Vélazar, who submitted a doctrinal memorandum to Prince Ferdinand (the future Ferdinand VI) warning of institutional decline.^[119] His son, Fernando Vélaz de Medrano y Bracamonte, 4th Marquess of Tabuérniga de Vélazar, twice a Grandee of Spain, was unjustly imprisoned and exiled by José de Gálvez, minister of the Indies, after reporting the same venality, fiscal exploitation, and administrative corruption Tomás condemned directly to Prince Charles (the future Charles IV) during the Bourbon Reforms in the Americas.^[120]

Medrano demonstrates the universal nature of merit, wisdom, and integrity, codified in his República Mista, by citing Titelman's commentary on Job:

"It was an ancient custom among the Eastern peoples, who lived according to natural law, to entrust the administration of the republic only to those who excelled others in wisdom and integrity."

Medrano asserts a juridical indicntment to illustrate that this aligns with the famous maxim of a celebrated philosopher:

"And would that in this age of ours, the most praiseworthy custom of those times, that most noble precept, were not so far removed, for among the Christian people, a most corrupt custom has taken hold: one which regards only noble lineage, neither the integrity of character, nor the clarity of wisdom, nor any of those qualities which ought to be held in the highest expectation.

A nobility of mere flesh (as they call it and contrive it) now, alas, renders even the ignorant and the depraved suitable for every office, whether civil or ecclesiastical. The antiquity of their portraits and the brightness of their ancestral line alone elevate men immersed in all manner of vice, even to the highest dignities, I must add, weighted down with multiple pontifical titles. This misfortune within the Holy Church of God, I deem so grievous that no amount of tears could ever rightly mourn it."

Medrano notes how the author appears to have a particular enmity toward the vices of the nobility, and "with good reason, for those who should serve as examples of virtue often lack it." Medrano explains that some believe it is wrong to honor a nobleman only because his ancestors earned distinction through virtue and valor when he himself is corrupt and unworthy. Doing so, he writes, dishonors true virtue and brings shame upon the ancestors who had once been rightly esteemed for their merits.

Medrano cites the Roman general and statesman Gaius Marius, who addressed the weak-hearted nobles who envied his achievements, saying:

"If they think they have reason to disdain me because I lack statues of my ancestors, they may feel the same way about their own forebears who built their nobility on virtue."

Tomás Fernández de Medrano defines the moral and social essence of nobility through advancement and prosperity (medrar) through virtue, wisdom, and divine justice, in contrast to medro, advancement through privilege, vanity, wealth, or deceit. He invoked Marius, and reinforced that true nobility is not inherited by birth but renewed through action and moral excellence, preserving both the honor of one's lineage and the integrity of the republic.

In his República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano defined how nobility in Spain functioned when properly ordered, codifying it as a moral condition rather than a hereditary privilege. He taught that the true measure of a man's worth lay not in his birth, but in his virtue and service to the republic:

When in the distribution of goods and honors, one considers more the worth of each person than his wealth or lineage, and values personal merit more than riches or the vain ostentation of ancestors, each person is given what is rightfully his.^[7]

Medrano codified a social and moral obligation in which advancement or prosperity (medrar) arises from merit and recognition. A direct historical example of this precept appears in New Spain in 1671, when Governor Juan de Medrano promoted Juan Domínguez de Mendoza to sargento mayor in the Spanish Tercio, immediately below that of maestre de campo, on the basis of his documented service record, which Juan de Medrano praised for its demonstration of his merits and quality.^[212]

Medrano explains that this system inspires even the humblest citizens to serve the common good:

Those who are poor or of humble status, with the hope of ennobling themselves and advancing, are motivated to perform marvels in service of the republic, just as I have seen the poorest soldiers, often regarded as ragged, perform.^[7]

He then turns to the nobility itself, warning that titles without virtue endanger both the noble house and the republic:

Generous men, hidalgos, and knights, recognizing that it does not benefit them to be noble only by blood but also by virtue, follow the example of their ancestors. To avoid losing for themselves what their ancestors left to them, they strive to imitate them and preserve the ancient luster of their house.^[7]

For Medrano, the hope of the humble and the vigilance of the noble form the dual pillars of a healthy government, therefore:

The hope of some and the justified fear of others are the health and conservation of the republic. For it is very true, as the saying goes, that if there is anything good in nobility, it is that it places a certain necessity upon nobles to imitate their predecessors and not fall short of the virtue and greatness that their forebears bequeathed to them.^[7]

Finally, he anchors this moral order in divine law and sacred example, invoking the dying words of Mattathias as a commandment to future generations:

This may have been why the glorious Mattathias said on his deathbed to his sons, Estote emulatores legis et date animas vestras pro testamento patrum, memores operum patrum, Be zealous for the law and give your lives for the testament of your fathers; remember the deeds of your fathers, and you will achieve eternal glory and an everlasting name.^[7]

This precept in the República Mista was embodied by Antonio Vélaz de Medrano, 1st Marquess of Tabuérniga, whose 1676 informaciones de méritos to the Council of Castile illustrate and affirm the application of this doctrine personally and within Medrano's government in Nieuwpoort (1671–1678), defended under his governorship during the Franco-Dutch War, which would conclude two years later following the Treaties of Nijmegen (1678–1679).^[81][213]

In his submission of 13 April 1676, Antonio Vélaz de Medrano recalled the deeds of his forefathers, including his progenitor in Igúzquiza, Andrés Vélaz de Medrano, and summarized his own service to the king as governor of Nieuwpoort in Flanders, as well as his military service in the wars of Flanders, Catalonia, Extremadura, and Galicia.^[93] According to a 2025 study by Cambridge University, in early modern Spain, royal service was regarded as a familial vocation rather than an individual achievement, as loyalty, merit, and royal favor were understood to accumulate across generations, granting officials both the credit and the obligation of their ancestors' service.^[27]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano codified the importance of legitimate nobility, when properly grounded in service, character, and inherited virtue. He maintained that delegated distinctions between noble and commoner were natural, divinely ordained, and socially stabilizing, provided they were governed by just and lawful precepts:

It is, indeed, necessary to have distinctions between the nobleman and the commoner, between the noble and the non-noble, between the great and the small, for just as God wills that there be various degrees in the republic, so too are there in heaven. Not all saints in glory are equal, nor do all stars possess the same magnitude and brightness.^[11]

While denouncing the elevation of unworthy men to high office, Medrano maintained that virtuous nobles must be honored and entrusted with leadership. Their elevation was not only just, but also essential for the prince's own authority and for the political stability of the realm.

In the end, it behooves the Prince to honor virtuous knights and nobles, to make use of them, to grant them great favor, and to prefer them over those who lack virtue. He should demonstrate by his actions that he recognizes and esteems what is deserved through their persons and through their fathers and grandfathers. For this, besides being reasonable and just, is crucial for the authority of the Prince himself and for the stability of his Kingdoms, which tend to become unsettled and disturbed when, disregarding the great and principal lords of his Estates who merit it, he serves instead people of low and vile standing.^[11]

Medrano warned that placing men of low character into high positions not only insulted the nobility but provoked dangerous instability:

Si rempublicam ignorantis non magni pretii hominibus committis, statim, et nobilium, ac strenuorum iram in te provocabis, ob contemptam eorum fidem, et maximis in rebus damna patieris ("If you entrust the republic to men of low worth, you will immediately provoke the ire of the nobility and valiant men because of your contempt for their loyalty, and you will suffer great losses in matters of importance.")^[11]

He contrasted this danger with the prosperous state of Spain in his own time, attributing it to the fact that noble and capable men held the reins of governance.

I do not believe that Spain has seen more glorious times than it does today in this regard, as the distinguished and grave personages (Princes, I may say) occupy the offices, hold the government positions, and serve in the Councils.^[11]

Tomás does not mention any personages by name, however his statement directly aligns with men such as García de Medrano y Castejón, who served in the Councils at the same time the República Mista (1602) was published.^[21]

After affirming that virtuous men occupy the offices, hold the government positions, and serve in the Councils, Tomás Fernández de Medrano then turned to legal authority, quoting a law from the Partidas to emphasize that nobility was not simply inherited but composed of virtuous character and usefulness to the Crown:

A law in the Partidas states these words: "To know how to use nobility is a clear union of virtues; for this, knights ought to be greatly honored for three reasons: first, for the nobility of their lineage; second, for their goodness; and third, for the benefit that comes from them. Therefore, kings should greatly honor them, as those with whom they are to accomplish their work."^[1]

This law persists decades after the publication of the República Mista (1602), exemplified by Francisco de Medrano y Bazán as councilor of Philip IV, and alcalde of the kings Casa y Corté.

A work titled Part sixteen of new and select comedies by the best minds in Spain was dedicated to him in 1662 by Mateo de la Bastide and published in Madrid by Melchor Sanchez.^[214]

An excerpt of the dedication by Mateo de la Bastide preserves Francisco and the doctrine for posterity in a judicial and administrative role. He wrote that he would not fulfill one of the many obligations advised by His Excellency unless he placed the work under his protection, so that with such refuge and defense, it may have "an immortal" duration:

To Don Francisco de Medrano y Bazan, Of His Majesty's Council and alcalde in His casa y corte: The benefits I have received from Your Excellency are so numerous that I have never forgotten them... confident in Your Excellency's kindness, for neither it nor I require the cultivation of lies disguised as flattery, since we are free from such a base means. Trusting Your Excellency's grace will not fail them, I choose as its auxiliary patron Your Excellency, whose merits, eloquence, wisdom, antiquity, and virtues, along with the adaptability and tireless effort required in the administration of justice, need no recounting.^[214]

Through the public dedication to Francisco de Medrano y Bazán's royal office, Mateo de la Bastide joins him in exemplifying the República Mista by Tomás. In rejecting "the cultivation of lies disguised as flattery," they also uphold Diego's Mirror of Princes (1657–1661), while fulfilling the Partidas' precept. His recognition by author, king, and law confirms that the Doctrine of Medrano was reaffirmed and honored in 1662.^[214]

After illustrating the law of the Partidas, Tomás closed this doctrinal statement with a direct warning about the damage done when rulers and the nobility align themselves with the ignoble, invoking classical authority:

What noble person is there who will align himself with the low and base? Vilis ille, qui tantum viles sibi admovet. "He is contemptible who only associates himself with the contemptible." Quis hostis eum non contemnat? "What enemy would not scorn him?" And what soldier would not feel humiliated to serve under his command?^[1]

And finally, teaching that the sovereign's ability to judge and recognize men was not instinctual, but a learned virtue essential to governance:

Teaching the King the importance of being able to recognize men, another law says that this knowledge consists of understanding their lineage, customs, character, and the deeds they have accomplished.^[52]

These precepts, including virtue before lineage, the recognition of character and deeds, and the obligation of rulers to appoint based on merit, guided the Spanish monarchs in their official appointments, sometimes setting aside tradition in order to appoint virtuous officials for the common good.^[71]

Kings such as Charles I, Philip II, Philip III, Philip IV, and Charles II applied these precepts in practice, selecting officials who embodied the Doctrine of Medrano. Personally chosen by the king "like Gideon,"^[14] Charles II requested that Diego Ros de Medrano, Bishop or Ourense, restore unity, order, and balance to the kingdom of Galicia, granting him the union of ecclesiastical, military, and civil authority over the region.^[71]

Diego Ros de Medrano's career under Charles II fulfilled the doctrine's central tenets: advancement (medrar) through service and example, moral integrity, and the exercise of juridical and ecclesiastical responsibility. As captain general and governor of the kingdom of Galicia through royal delegation, his intervention and government directly restored unity, prosperity (medrar), and the three foundational precepts of religion, obedience, and justice to the Galicians.^[14][71]

Educated at the Colegio Mayor de San Ildefonso during the reforms of García de Medrano, and later a professor there, he became an exemplar of Medrano's reforms in Ildefonso while enacting the precepts of religion, obedience, and justice in Ourense, ruling from his own cathedra, administering the diocese in delegated pastoral and juridical authority.^[14]

In the República Mista, Tomás Fernández de Medrano used the example of Sparta to illustrate why prosperity (medrar) can occur:

Someone once asked why Sparta prospered. Was it because the kings knew how to rule? 'No,' came the reply, 'but because the citizens knew how to obey.'

Tomás codified the unity of a state as the harmony of all its parts under divine and natural law, preventing the abuses of any one group from excessively dominating another, a unity that historically allowed the Spanish Empire to prosper (medrar):

Unity in all things sustains a kingdom, and this unity is what has allowed our own to prosper to this day, with honors, public positions, and benefits usually distributed according to each person's status, and each safeguarded with their privileges and preeminence. All due diligence is taken to prevent any one group from excessively dominating another: that the nobility does not trample the common people, nor drive them to despair, and that the people, through their arts, trades, and the positions they hold, do not enrich themselves in ways that harm the nobles.

In the República Mista, Tomás codified justice as the divine law that binds humanity to God and one another:

Justice reveals the distinction between the good and the bad. It is a divine law and the bond of human society; without it, nothing but confusion can result. To reward the wicked in place of the good, or to afflict the good and leave the wicked unpunished, is to confuse vice with virtue. No monarchy, kingdom, or republic can be properly ruled, governed, or preserved in peace without justice, the counsel of the experienced, and the favor of divine wisdom, for it is through wisdom that we know God and revere Him.

Tomás uses Plato's exemplar of political theology to codify the divine duty of justice and why faith must be upheld by it:

The Philosopher calls justice a general virtue, because one who fully possesses it may be said to hold all other virtues as well. Without prudence, one cannot distinguish between justice and injustice... nor fulfill the most divine duty of justice, which is to help the afflicted and oppressed with all one's strength. Faith, the foundation of justice, exists because of justice; if faith were not upheld by justice, who would not deem it legitimate to seize power by any means necessary and to treat dominion as a prize for whomever can take it? If we seek to exercise justice perfectly, as Plato advises, we should make no distinction among men for friendship, kinship, wealth, or dignity. This virtue requires that we set aside private benefit for the public good, even to our own detriment.

Medrano quotes Lactantius to illustrate corrupt advancement (medro) and affirms that justice is not possible without reverence for God:

"Only the fear of God preserves harmony among men. For those who wield weapons, force, and power would often seek to dominate and oppress others... if religion did not restrain such inclinations."^[10]

Justice is the measure of all political legitimacy. He warns that if the wicked are favored and the virtuous cast aside, hope for prosperity (medrar) fades:

"A law is the rule of justice, and justice is the purpose of the law. Cicero says the law is the soul of the republic, the blood that gives it life, and the rule that sustains the state. A republic is close to ruin when those condemned by law are pardoned, and judgments are reversed. When the wicked are favored and the virtuous cast aside, hope for prosperity fades."^[11]

Medrano codified religion as the foundation of all legitimate government, obedience as its form, and justice as its fulfillment. Each precept reinforces the others to maintain political order.

Medrano affirms the good will be rewarded, and the wicked will be published. He cites St. Isidore and declares:

Sine iustitia quid sunt regna nisi magna latrocinia? ("Without justice, what are kingdoms but great robberies?")^[11]

Through his República Mista (1612), Tomás Fernández de Medrano transformed ancient philosophy and political theology into doctrine by codifying religion, obedience, and justice as divine precepts of the state and the laws by which both heaven and society are bound.^[1] Medrano affirms in his República Mista that "when religion and law remain united, as they do in the Spanish monarchy," then governments "will live and stand for a thousand ages."^[52]

Long before his República Mista (1602), Tomás Fernández de Medrano lived at the royal court and advised Philip II of Spain, directly influencing the Spanish monarchy and its allied courts, demonstrating that the precepts in República Mista were already operating in statecraft and diplomacy before they were ever codified.^[215] On 1 August 1591, Medrano was appointed as counselor and Secretary of State and War in the Duchy of Savoy under Charles Emmanuel I, Duke of Savoy, and his consort Princess Catalina Micaela of Spain, daughter of Philip II.^[216][8]

Infanta Catalina Micaela, Duchess of Savoy, was born of his marriage to Isabella of Valois, the third of his four wives. A notable confirmation of Medrano's royal service is preserved in letters from Philip II to his daughter Catalina Micaela, edited by Fernando Bouza.^[216]

In 1592, King Philip II personally acknowledged Tomás Fernández de Medrano's diplomatic service in a letter to his daughter, Infanta Catalina Micaela, Duchess of Savoy. The king not only praised Medrano's mission, but also affirmed the high level of trust placed in him as royal envoy and counselor.^[217] Writing on 31 January 1592, Philip II addresses his daughter Catalina Micaela:

I was very pleased with the news of your health and that of my grandchildren, which you conveyed in your letters from the end of last month and the fifth and sixth of this one. And you are quite right in saying that the Duke takes too many risks too often. Although I have already advised him many times, I will now do so again through Medrano, whom I have sent there, and whose decision to visit you I have highly approved.^[216]

Infanta Catalina Micaela, Duchess of Savoy, had previously expressed concern about her husband's actions. Her correspondence, combined with Medrano's discretion, demonstrates the reliance of the Spanish Crown on trusted intermediaries to anticipate royal command and safeguard dynastic stability.^[52]

Medrano was sent on numerous occasions to deal with matters of state between the royal courts of Madrid and Savoy. On 12 February 1592, Philip II informed the Duke of Savoy that he had received Tomás Fernández de Medrano, where he "treated important matters for His Royal Service." Satisfied with Medrano's service, Philip II of Spain ordered a payment of 1,000 ducats to cover his travel expenses upon his return.^[217] The appointment of Medrano as secretary of state and war was a strategic deployment by the Spanish Crown and the duke to ensure loyalty and exercise imperial oversight at a critical dynastic frontier in Savoy.^[17]

He later became Counselor and Secretary of State and War for the Princes of Savoy, grandchildren of Philip II of Spain.^[8] On 6 April 1606, Prince Emmanuel Philibert, son of Charles Emmanuel, Duke of Savoy, and Infanta Catalina Micaela of Spain, wrote to Philip III's valido, Francisco de Sandoval y Rojas, 1st Duke of Lerma, requesting royal honors for Medrano:

With more patience than ourselves does Tomás Fernández de Medrano, our secretary, endure not finding himself with a title from the King my lord. For so many years we have known his many qualities and merits... my brother the prince and I beg Your Excellency with all the earnestness we can; and we assure you that the Duke, my lord and my father, will esteem it infinitely to see him highly honored, both for what we all owe and desire for Doña Isabel de Sandoval, his wife, and for him.^[79]

Through Isabel de Sandoval, Medrano's wife, the family secured marital ties with the House of Sandoval, aligning themselves with the valido of Spain, Francisco de Sandoval, 1st Duke of Lerma, and reinforcing their alliances across the other Great Houses of Spain.^[17] Tomás and Isabel were the parents of Juan Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval (b. 1595), their firstborn son and heir, who entered religious life as a friar and monk at San Prudencio de Monte Laturce, and Ana María Fernández de Medrano y Sandoval (b. 1608), who served as lady-in-waiting to Queen Isabel de Borbón, consort of King Philip IV of Spain.^[8]

The doctrine codified in the República Mista were carried forward by members of the House of Medrano, including Tomás's great-nephew, Diego Fernández de Medrano, chaplain of Luis Méndez de Haro, and in his Mirror of Princes, where he offered Philip Prospero, Prince of Asturias, princely counsel and a mirror of legitimacy itself.^[67]

Through Diego's paternal inheritance, he also bore the title Señor de la Torre y Casa de la Vega en Rioja, directly linking the Medrano family to the historic union between the House of Mendoza and the House of Lasso de la Vega, progenitors of the Constables of Castile, the Marquesses of Santillana, and the Dukes of Infantado.^[67][218] By the seventeenth century, Diego's inheritance of this noble estate affirmed the Medrano family's enduring integration into the highest ranks of Castilian aristocracy, and reinforced the doctrinal authority with which Diego served as chaplain to the valido Luis Méndez de Haro under Philip IV of Spain.^[51]

According to Luis Núñez Burillo y Ginel de Medrano, a branch of the de Medrano y Mendoza de Borbón family lineage, which included the Counts of Coruña, Dukes of Bourbon (Peers of France), Marquesses of Santillana, and Dukes of Infantado, was renowned for its academic and intellectual achievements.^[219]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano's ancestors had lived at court with the Castilian kings for centuries, enacting precepts and doctrine within their delegated roles. Diego López de Medrano, the guardian of King John II of Castile, made his will on 12 November 1434.^[149] The branch in Soria was likewise integrated into the 12 lineages of Soria, including marital ties with the House of Barnuevo, binding the Medranos not only to Spain's most powerful noble dynasties but also to the hereditary guardians of Castilian lineage.^[220] Under the Trastámara dynasty, the House of Medrano continued to receive protection from the Catholic Monarchs of Spain, exemplifying medrar during the Renaissance.^[106]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano was also the relative of Diego López de Medrano y Vergara, Lord of San Gregorio, and a member of His Majesty's Council. His arms, featuring a castle, goshawk, and hollow cross fleury with a crown on top, are preserved in stone at the Castle of San Gregorio, further affirming his rank and presence among the highest nobility of Castile. He is the father of Luisa de Medrano, Garcí Bravo de Medrano, Alcaide of Atienza, and Catalina de Medrano, lady-in-waiting to Isabella I of Castile, among many others.^[221] Diego's wife Magdalena Bravo de Lagunas was the great-great-granddaughter of Alonso Pérez de Guzmán (1256–1309), progenitor of the Dukes of Medina Sidonia. Diego López de Medrano y Vergara is also the progenitor of the Counts of Torrubia, who were united through marriage with the Dukes of Villahermosa, Marquesses of Villamayor, Marquesses of Salamanca, Dukes of Sotomayor, and Dukes of Alba.^[221]

In 1568, Diego Lopéz de Medrano y Vergara's grandson Garcí Bravo de Medrano y Mendoza preserved one of the most emblematic heraldic representations of the Medrano lineage in Guadalajara, the recognizable hollow cross fleury motif with their progenitors hand and goshawk, surrounded by the Ave Maria Gratia Plena Dominus Tecum family motto.^[82] The coat of arms of Garci Bravo de Medrano y Mendoza, son of Garcí Bravo de Medrano, alcaide of the castle of Atienza, displays the noble arms of the Medrano family entwined with those of the Bravo, Lagunas, and Mendoza houses. Diego's grandson Garcí Bravo de Medrano y Mendoza was linked to the 1st Count of Priego and the 2nd Count of Luna, making him a descendant of King Alfonso IX of León and Queen Berengaria of Castile through his maternal lineage.^[222] The same cross motif found on the stone-carved coat of arms of Garci Bravo de Medrano y Mendoza also appears on the arms of Tomás Fernández de Medrano. This visual continuity connects the doctrinal authority of Tomás with the noble lineage of Medrano in Soria. It affirms a shared identity of service, nobility, and endurance across generations of the Medrano family.^[7]

The Medrano family sealed their loyalty to John II's daughter Queen Isabella I of Castile, when Diego López de Medrano y Vergara was killed in her service during the Siege of Málaga (1487) beside his father in-law.^[106] Diego López de Medrano y Vergara's daughter, Catalina de Medrano y Bravo de Lagunas, served as lady-in-waiting to Queen Isabella I of Castile, and took part in the custody and care of Queen Joanna of Castile, mother of Charles V, at the Royal Palace of Tordesillas. By 1516, Charles had ascended to the throne as King of Spain.^[223]

Generational service continued into the reign of Charles I, King of Spain, who became Holy Roman Emperor as Charles V in 1519. Tomás Fernández de Medrano's relatives, Diego López de Medrano y Vinuesa, lord of San Gregorio, served as mayordomo mayor (High Steward) to Empress Isabella of Portugal, wife of Charles V and mother of Philip II, and his namesake son Diego López de Medrano became caballerizo mayor to Philip II, while his second son, Francisco de Medrano, served as royal treasurer to Carlos, Prince of Asturias.^[152]

On 1 September 1552, Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, issued a Carta Ejecutoria (executive letter) [es] formally reaffirming the noble status of the Medrano family in favor of Tomás's relatives Bernardino de Medrano, Pedro López de Medrano, and Francisco de Medrano.^[110] The Medranos commissioned richly illuminated and finely bound personal copies, customizing them to preserve both their piety and loyalty to Charles V, as well as their own noble status.^[224] Compiled in Valladolid and Arenas, Spain, the 1552 Carta Ejecutoria, richly adorned with golden floral illumination beneath the inscription "A Don Carlos," bears the imperial coat of arms of the Holy Roman Emperor and addresses Charles V by his full sovereign titles.^[110]

The manuscript presents extensive genealogical testimony affirming the Medrano family's noble lineage, and concludes with formal signatures and seals certifying the legitimacy of their nobility under both Spanish and imperial law. It also preserves copies of earlier grants and confirmations issued in the names of Countess Juana Pimentel, King Henry III, Álvaro de Luna, and other notable figures.^[110] On page 6 of the Carta Ejecutoria, the document reproduces a case in which opposing parties sought to levy taxes unlawfully upon a member of the Medrano family. However, since the noble claim of the said Medrano was "public and notorious," the king ordered that "our writ of execution (Carta Ejecutoria) be granted in his favor against the said opposing parties."^[110]

The affirmation of "public and notorious" nobility on page 6 of the Carta Ejecutoria aligns with accounts preserved in the National Central Library of Rome. In 1612, Francisco Mosquera de Barnuevo, from Soria, writing in Seville, recorded in his La Numantina that:

The Medrano family, whose nobility is so notorious that there is no house in Spain that surpasses it... are natives of Navarre.^[225][220]

Medrano's relative Juan de Medrano became Reyes de Armas of Castile and England under Charles V. Through Juan, the Medranos were not just recognized as noble; they were the ones invested with imperial authority to recognize others.^[226][152]

During the reign of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, Tomás's relative Juan de Medrano served as King of Arms of Castile and England (Castilla y Inglaterra Rey de Armas).^[227][226] Juan served as King of Arms following Philip's marriage to Queen Mary I in 1554. Philip II of Spain assumed the title of King of England and Ireland jure uxoris. During their joint reign (1554–1558), the heraldic arms of Mary I and Philip II were displayed in impalement, combining the royal arms of England with those of Spain.^[227][226]

Tomás Fernández de Medrano, in República Mista (1602), defined the Rey de Armas as a juridical and symbolic officer of sovereign dignity. He traced the office to sacred and classical origins, presenting it as essential to monarchy. He recounted that Bacchus, after conquering India, created the Reyes de Armas as a noble order exempt from war:

Bacchus: "I free you from the toils of war and want you to be known as seasoned soldiers and heroes. Your duty will be to serve the republic by punishing wrongdoers, praising the good, and otherwise performing your duties exempt from other burdens. In the places you travel, the kings will provide you with whatever you need, whether food or clothing. You will be honored by all and by princes with their gifts. Your words will carry weight, and you will flee from lies. You will judge traitors and declare infamous those who speak ill of women. You shall have the freedom to go where you wish, with safe passage and residence. And if anyone injures you or yours, by word or deed, that person shall be punished with death and loss of property."

Medrano noted that Alexander the Great confirmed these privileges, granting the heralds gold, purple, and royal insignia. Augustus codified their immunity under Roman law, and Charlemagne reaffirmed their status, declaring that harm against them would be treated as treason. He cited Lucas de Peña, Nobiliario Vero, Feron of France, Eneas Silvius, Thucydides, Herodotus, Megasthenes, and Xenophon as authorities attesting to their universal dignity. He concluded:

Even the humblest of those who serve near kings and occupy their courts are invested with mysteries. For these and many other reasons, we ought to venerate and respect them.

This doctrinal vision positioned the Rey de Armas as a mediator of royal power and lineage within the sovereign body. It explains Juan de Medrano's prominence as Rey de Armas of Castile and England, whose work embodied the precepts later codified in República Mista.

On 23 January 1555, during a chapter of the Order of the Golden Fleece held at Antwerp before Emperor Charles V, Juan (Jehan) de Medrano officiated as one of five heralds at the creation of Rolant Longin as a knight of the order.^[227] The ceremony was authenticated by Anthone de Boulaincourt, Toison d'Or King of Arms, Estienne de Morez (Hainault), Claude Marion (Burgundy), together with Juan de Medrano and Pierre des Vernois, both serving as Kings of Arms of the King of Castile and England.^[227] His role as officiant situated the Medrano family within the institutional core of Habsburg chivalric legitimacy, as the Golden Fleece represented the highest order of knighthood in Europe. This function is preserved in the illuminated manuscript of the ceremony, written in French secretary hand and later cited by Elias Ashmole in The Order of the Garter (1672).^{[227][228][226]}

• Favorite
• Tomás Fernández de Medrano
• Philip III of Spain
• Philip II of Spain
• Habsburg Spain
• House of Bourbon
• Diego Fernández de Medrano y Zenizeros, Lord of Valdeosera
• Royal Military and Mathematics Academy of Brussels
• Medrano Academy
• Royal reform of the Colegio Mayor de San Ildefonso
• Medrano

• Cifelli, Mario (2013). "Del privado al ministro: modelos y estrategias de legitimación del poder en la corte de Felipe III". La Perinola. 17: 47–78.
• Fernández de Medrano, Juan (1602). República Mista (in Spanish). Imprenta Real.
• Fernández de Medrano, Juan (1602). "República mista, dirigida a D. Francisco de Sandoval Duque de Lerma... Parte primera". Biblioteca del Banco de España (in Spanish).
• Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros, Diego (2024-09-01). "Heroic and Flying Fame of Don Luis Méndez de Haro, Count-Duke of Olivares". Archived from the original on 2024-09-01. Retrieved 2025-03-26.
• Fernández de Medrano Zenizeros, Diego. "Mirror of Princes: Crucible of their Virtues, Astonishment of their Failings, Soul of their Government and Government of their Soul". Mirror of Princes.
• Fernández Albaladejo, Pablo (2020). "El debate sobre el privado en la monarquía hispánica (1598–1621): formas de la crítica política en la temprana Edad Moderna". Magallánica: Revista de Historia Moderna. 6 (11): 67–98.
• Guadagnin, Erika (2022). "Capitolo IV. Philosophia Rationalis Naturalis Moralis". La Philosophia nella Grande Galleria (in Italian). Ledizioni. pp. 179–501. ISBN 978-88-5526-928-5.
• "Historia Hispánica - Juan Martínez de Medrano". Retrieved 2025-04-07.
• HI Iberia Ingeniería y Proyectos. "Historia Hispánica – Diego Ros de Medrano" (in Spanish). Retrieved 2025-04-11.
• Pinillos Lafuente, Luis (2021). "Tomás Fernández de Medrano, consejero y secretario de Estado y Guerra de los Duques de Saboya, divisero del Solar de Valdeosera" (PDF). Cuadernos de Ayala (87).
• "Inventarios y Bibliotecas del Siglo de Oro – Ficha de edición". Retrieved 2025-03-19.
• "Republica Mista". Retrieved 2025-03-19.
• Loira, Javier Patiño (2017). ""Meddling with Royal Hearts": Interiority and Privanza (1598–1643)". Culture & History Digital Journal.
• López-Asiain, María (2020). "El Palacio Real de Valladolid: Escenario de la Corte de Felipe III". Dossier Ciudades (6).
• Mrozek Eliszezynski, Giuseppe (2018). "The Figure of the Royal Favourite in Spanish Political Treatises of the Early 17th Century" (PDF). Mediterranea: Ricerche Storiche: 397–423.
• Salazar, Fray Juan de (1997). Herrero García, Miguel (ed.). Política española. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales.
• Tellez, Diego (2015). "Tomás y Juan Fernández de Medrano: una saga camerana a fines del s. XVI y comienzos del s. XVII". Berceo.
• "Tomás Fernández Medrano". dbe.rah.es. Retrieved 2025-03-19.
• Van Gelderen, Martin (2002). Skinner, Quentin (ed.). Republicanism: A Shared European Heritage (PDF). Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. pp. 268, 281.
• Fortún Pérez de Ciriza, Francisco Javier (2007). "Perfiles del vasallaje en la Navarra bajomedieval". Príncipe de Viana. 68 (250): 469–502. Retrieved 19 May 2025.

• República Mista by Tomás Fernández de Medrano (1602), published in Madrid.
• Heroic and soaring fame of the Most Excellent Lord Don Luis Méndez de Haro by Diego Fernández de Medrano y Zenizeros.
• Mirror of Princes: Crucible of their Virtues, Astonishment of their Failings, Soul of their Government and Government of their Soul by Diego Fernández de Medrano y Zenizeros, Lord of Valdeosera and Sojuela.