The household as a reflection of government

So it seems that there exists a certain theme between some of the readings from last week and this week.  Allyson Poska in her article “Elusive Virtue” masterfully depicted that female chastity and virtue were not as prevalent of ideals in early modern Spain as they were in other parts of Europe.  Similarly, Kimberly Gauderman explains that the centralized authority in the realm of the household and government were not principles held by pre-colonial Spaniards, though their neighboring countries followed these norms.

Ironically enough, Spain and Spanish territories followed what we deem more “progressive” norms prior to the colonial period.  There existed less of a discrepancy between the autonomy of men and women in society during the earlier years; however, they also followed a method of governing that was extremely curious for that period.  During the Reconquest, the Spanish crown expanded into many different territories each with their own set of traditions and lifestyles, and with these conquests, the new Spanish territories were allowed to self-govern with the decree “I obey but do not execute.” Gauderman points out that many of the crown’s wishes were unfulfilled, such as the crown’s orders for the Peruvian government to pay higher taxes.  The Peruvian viceroy utilized the “I obey but do not execute” decree in this situation because the crown did not lose money to attain the territory nor had they provided any extra benefit to the Peruvians that would require extra taxation.  This reflected just one facet of the decentralization of the Spanish government, but the point that Gauderman is trying to convey is that the authority of the household reflects that of the government in that in areas where a centralized authority with a male figurehead was valued, so were the ideals of female subordination.  Conversely, the authority of the Spanish government was ambiguous and as such, so was the authority of the private household.  Because men and women were both allowed to inherit equally and retain ownership of property after marriage and both parties made decisions about the family economy, one could not safely conclude that one party held absolute power in the household.  Women also were allowed to pass on their inheritance to their children regardless of whether or not their husbands approved of the issuance.  Women were also provided with several other rights that would suggest that the idea of women as “lesser beings” did not prevail during this time in Spain.  Also, when considering the argument that Poska made in her article that the loss of female chastity often went without much consequence, it would seem that women were allowed sovereignty and equality.

I am curious as to how these ideals suddenly switched to more conservative and chauvinistic values during the later Colonial time period.  I can’t imagine that the implementation of these ideals would have brought much benefit to the society, but if Gauderman’s theory is correct and the household reflects the government, then the progression to a centralized government would provoke the need for a central authority within the private realm, and it seems that men won that privilege.