When I heard the news of the abdication of Juan Carlos I, by a strange association of ideas, I went back in my imagination eight centuries ago, recalling the imperishable gesture of King Alfonso XI of Castile. After having self-dressed himself as a knight with only attendance of the movable arm of the mechanical sculpture of St. James the Apostle, he decided to crown himself, without the attendance of any ecclesiastical authority.

It is easy to imagine the surprise of the archbishop, the legitimate minister of the coronation ceremony, having to passively observe the scene. Even today, as we consider ourselves a secularist and secularized society, we are still in awe of a courageous gesture, of a king determined to demonstrate, with a solemn gesture, the autonomy of the secular power with respect to the spiritual realm. Still in plenary session of the Executive Council twentieth century, the last great coronation followed by the whole world, that of Elizabeth II of England, had to be assisted by a sacred minister to validate it. King Spanish was almost seven centuries ahead of the Queen of England and bequeathed us with his gesture the dignity of one who fights for the autonomy of his jurisdiction, while respecting the jurisdiction of the other.

These thoughts about the precocious secularization of the Castilian monarchy, contrasting with the eternal clericalization of the English monarchy, immediately came to mind when reflecting on Juan Carlos I's gesture of abdication.

Commentators will inquire these days about the motivations behind his decision, but it is clear that this gesture is nothing exceptional, if we consider the precedents in the Hispanic monarchy. Charles V abdicated in 1555, to find a peace that his galloping reign did not allow him and, more recently, Alfonso XIII resigned in 1931 as Head of State (although without a formal abdication), in the face of the evident advance of republicanism in Spain. Neither one nor the other motivation is applicable to Juan Carlos I, but, together with other Spanish kings who abdicated such as Felipe V, Carlos IV and Isabel II, history shows us that the gesture of the abdication of the king is not something extraordinary in Spain.

These days there will logically be much debate about the convenience and opportunity to continue maintaining the monarchy. I would just like to add that this institution provides two values that are by no means negligible in our society: permanence and stability. The Spanish monarchy is heir to the various medieval peninsular monarchies (mainly Castilian, Aragonese and Navarrese) and, therefore, has more than thirteen centuries of history. The long duration and weight of tradition is not in itself a definitive argument, but neither is it such as to be frivolously disregarded.

With respect to stability, it is clear that the recent history of Spain has shown that, despite its ups and downs (and also the mistakes made by the King himself), the monarchy has proved to be an institution that has ensured constitutional continuity and a certain sensitivity to combine the common with the particular of the various regions of Spain, something very necessary today. However, I would argue that not even the monarchy itself should be exempt from the watchful eye of society, so that, in addition to these obvious qualities, the responsibility of Felipe VI is undoubtedly enormous, and I would venture to say that he cannot afford to make any more major mistakes. He undoubtedly has the real support of broad sectors of society, but he must also have the conviction that he must earn his position, and the trust of the people, like any other citizen who carries out his work with effort and dignity.