This workshop aims to discuss the degrees of freedom - its limits and contradictions - enjoyed by those ordinary people who were subject, in a broad sense, to a master or lord. The organisers are interested also in distinguishing between common situations and abuses, and in discussing differences among groups that were subject to restrictions of their freedom. The organisers want to bring together specialists working on different territories of the Iberian worlds. The historiographies of these territories are often separated from each other, despite important entanglements both on the level of norms and practices. It is precisely in these complex worlds that the organisers are interested in discussing different cases that shed light on both the regulations related to freedom and its conditioning factors, as well as the practices and their variations. Although what is most striking about these Iberian worlds is their diversity, even in legal terms, they believe that a joint discussion will help to highlight the presence of some common characteristics that will contribute to better define the notion of freedom.

A joint discussion will allow to analyse, for example, whether mobility rights varied according to the “nation” (meaning geographical, social and cultural origin) of each person, or whether restrictions on freedom changed when a person moved to another jurisdiction inside these Iberian worlds. Case studies have shown, for example, that from very early on, with the promulgation of the New Laws in 1542, it was established that the indigenous peoples of Spanish America, with a few exceptions, could not be enslaved. This prohibition did not affect the Philippines, where slavery continued for a few more decades after the promulgation of the New Laws, with exceptions. Beginning in that year and continuing throughout the 17th century, the Crown repeatedly forbade various forms of personal service. However, throughout Spanish America, one finds many labour relationships that resemble serfdom, which furthermore entailed restrictions on mobility, choice of "masters," and ability to choose when and where to work. The same was true for forced migrations which provided labour for various peoples and/or colonial enterprises. In addition, specialized literature has given an account of the different forms of tutelage that affected people who had been enslaved but had gained access to freedom in one way or another. It is known that in the Iberian Peninsula, too, the concept of freedom was limited according to the status to which one belonged. For example, in sixteenth century Toledo some peasants were still obliged to transport their lord's grain, although these obligations were disappearing. It is also known that many poor Portuguese were subject to a master and depended on him for food, shelter and clothing. These masters had, moreover, power to punish all who lived in their households. Living conditions of the enslaved people in the Iberian worlds, moreover, were very different: working in the mine of Potosí was not the same as being a domestic slave in Mexico, or working in a hacienda in Brazil, or in one of the plantations in Africa. Discussing the scope of freedom in all these cases in the context of the Iberian worlds will help to move the proposed goals forward.