Mass expulsion edicts justified collective punishment through corporation-dissolution doctrine.

Evidence

To justify its harsh provisions aimed at subjects who had not been guilty of rebellion, the preamble to this edict finds it desirable to blacken the reputation of these Moriscos; it was not just that they “were or preceded from those who concurred with the rising in the Kingdom of Granada” (and that was not true in all cases), they had, so it was alleged, subsequently had treasonable dealings with the Turks and with “other princes to whom they offered their persons and their possessions.” They had failed to reveal the plots that had been launched against Spain, “a clear sign they are all of the same opinion.” In order to silence those who might claim that individual guilt had not been demonstrated, the edict then adduces an argument based on group responsibility: “When some detestable crime is committed by members of some corporation or college, it is only right that the body should be dissolved, and that some should be punished for the offenses of others.” Thus, without exception, the Moriscos were all to be expelled (no exceptions being made for infants) and were obliged to leave within thirty days. — L. P. Harvey, Muslims in Spain, 1500 to 1614, 1516

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the collective-guilt logic behind other group expulsions and forced diasporas — parallels with national security regimes and 20th-century ethnic cleansing justifications.
• DEFINE: Shows how the ‘corporation must be dissolved for the crimes of some members’ legal doctrine worked as a template for collective expulsion.