Descriptions of María de Padilla
The chronicler Pedro López de Ayala, who knew María de Padilla—as he was both a contemporary and a servant of King Peter I of Castile—said of her in his Chronicle of King Don Pedro that she was “a woman of good lineage, and beautiful, and small of body, and of good understanding.”
In the Chronicle of Spain, begun by the Archbishop of Toledo, Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada, continued by the Bishop of Burgos, Gonzalo de Hinojosa, and later by an anonymous author until 1454, María de Padilla’s beauty is praised, recognizing her as “the most graceful maiden to be found in the world at that time.”
Esteban de Garibay, in a historical compendium of 1571, emphasizes María’s determination to ensure that Peter I had the support of the great men of the realm. Likewise, recognizing her wise and discreet character, she helped to temper the king’s fury and bloodthirsty cruelty.
Much closer in time, Prosper Mérimée, in his Chronicle of Pedro I, King of Castile (1848), notes that María de Padilla “was small in stature, pretty, lively, and full of that voluptuous grace peculiar to the women of the South.”
Likewise, Juan Blas Sitges y Grifoll, in a rigorous study on the women of King Don Pedro, considers María de Padilla to have been little inclined to greed, nor does her conduct reveal a vengeful spirit: “Not a single instance is cited in which she appears vindictive, despite the hostility that many showed toward her, nor is there any evidence that she was eager to amass wealth on her own account.”
A “sweet and balanced Castilian” is how Casilda Ordóñez (1975) describes María de Padilla. The author writes, “Doña Maria appears before the eyes of history on a day in May 1352, to be, for nine years, the long-suffering companion of a cruel or justice-dealing king, a constant traveler; his balance and his support.”
María Jesús Fuente (2007) maintains that “above any other woman, the female figure most vilified by anti-Petrist propaganda was that of the king’s mistress, María de Padilla.”
Diego Ortiz de Zúñiga writes in 1677 that King Peter was bewitched by María de Padilla “through the force of her charms,” but not “by infamous arts, as is the common error,” fostered by the circulation of ballads. The attribution of magical and bewitching powers to María de Padilla thus soon appeared in the propagandistic narrative, both to captivate Peter I and later to turn him away from Blanche of Bourbon, with a belt that, given to the king by his newly wedded wife, becomes a frightful serpent; although, in that case, a Jewish sorcerer sought out by Doña María intervenes.
The ballads significantly influenced the transmission of what might be taken as the contemporary reality of events occurring at that time, although they were often distorted to serve propaganda and the interests of their promoters. María de Padilla appears in them as a mistress of dark arts and a maker of potions. Harsh wickedness is attributed to her. She is indeed portrayed as urging King Peter to have Blanche of Bourbon put to death.
María de Padilla was even, anachronistically, regarded as a queen of the gypsies, who did not arrive in Europe until a century later. Nevertheless, once her magical nature had been spread, she was, over time, adopted as a representative entity, invoked in a wide variety of spells by numerous sorceresses who were prosecuted by the Spanish Inquisition. Her portrayal as a diabolical entity spread not only throughout the Iberian Peninsula, but also reached Latin America, where it became associated with religions of African origin.
Antonio Montero Alcaide, María de Padilla; Favorita del rey Don Pedro y reina después de morir
stormborns
areudirty
izzy806
