[1] Though a conservative, during Trienio Liberal (1821–1823) Gil was particularly active enlarging Villafranca's holdings by massive purchases of former Church property, put on sale during the first wave of desamortización.

Before moving on diplomatic mission to Prussia he worked as local tax collector; since the job was inheritable, it was taken over by Juan's younger son and the future father of Enrique, Eugenio Gil y Carrasco (1819–?).

[18] In 1874 Gil apparently intended to take part in contest for chairs of elementos de derecho publico y administrativo español, to be held by universities in Oviedo, Valencia and Granada.

[19] In July 1875 he did, however, participate in the contest for chairing cátedra de derecho político y administrativo in his native University of Salamanca, and emerged successful,[20] in 1876 nominated catedrático numerario.

[24] In 1882-1883 he fielded his candidature for derecho publico at Universidad Central in Madrid; the attempt was unsuccessful following some repeated changes of the admission procedure, which might be interpreted as aimed against Gil.

In the early 1880s he had to suffer aggression from liberal circles both in the city and at the Salamanca university;[27] as late as in the mid-1880s he was referred to as "almost unknown" in the world of Spanish law scholars.

[28] Gradually gaining recognition, throughout his career Gil was a number of times acting as judge in numerous contests for academic chairs across Spain and took part in national juridical congresses.

[34] Largely aided by arrival of Pedro Dorado Montero, they gained ground in the 1900s,[35] though Gil Robles until his death remained an iconic Salamanca figure.

[36] Enrique Gil Robles was not a prolific writer; his written heritage is one major work, few booklets, a couple of articles in specialized reviews and a handful of manuscripts.

Spanning across over 1,100 pages, the work was intended to provide exhaustive lecture on organization of state in general and principles of public law in particular, though it grew into synthesis of author's view on politics, history and religion.

Two other publications, incomparable in size but far more often quoted, are two booklets: El absolutismo y la democracia (1891, containing his address opening the academic year in University of Salamanca) and Oligarquía y caciquismo.

[39] Gil's written heritage is complete with very few scholarly articles on politics, education and law,[40] one translation from German (Friedrich Julius Stahl, Rechtsphilosophie) and an unspecified number of pieces contributed to local and national periodicals.

[42] Some suggest that Gil's doctrine formed part of regenerationism and was largely a response to the 1898 disaster;[43] most scholars claim that his thought continued earlier 19th Traditionalist works, especially those of Donoso Cortés, and developed mostly as reaction to the 1868 revolution.

[44] All students agree that Gil diagnosed the key malady of Spain as Liberalism, which destroyed traditional structures and replaced them with bourgeoisie oligarchy, exercised systematically by means of industry and trade and personally by the network of caciques.

[45] The prescription advocated was reversal to the spirit and partially institutions of Antiguo Régimen;[46] two key elements of Gil's vision were organic society and sovereign king.

[55] Democracy[56] is not a political regime, but a constituting principle of such a society;[57] it means recognition of roles performed by various groups and of their internal sovereignty,[58] which at times might include the right to coerce.

[80] No source confirms (or denies) that he took part in the Third Carlist War, though some obituaries ambiguously claim that he "led the brave youth of Salamanca [...] fighting to defend Spain" of his ideal;[81] it remains mysterious why he failed to attend 1874 hearings for academic posts he signed up to.

[84] Engaged in broad Traditionalist movement, he prepared a massive 1882 pilgrimage to Rome[85] and co-signed letters of support, addressed to ecclesiastical hierarchs and animated by the Nocedals.

[109] In the parliament he became the spokesman of the Carlist minority[110] and until 1905 was fairly frequently reported by the press as active on a variety of issues,[111] ranging from education[112] to Catalan question,[113] legal order,[114] organization of trade,[115] foreign policy,[116] internal rules of the Congress[117] and religion.

The intransigent Integrists clashed with the Spanish ecclesiastical hierarchy, which advocated the platform of Catholic unity, almost from the onset, which finally led to calling off the 1882 pilgrimage to Rome.

[136] The conflict climaxed in 1892, when Cámara banned local Catholics from reading La Región[137] and all periodicals edited by Manuel Sánchez Asensio and Gil Robles.

After 1891 death of Mariano Arés Sanz the Salmantine academic realm was almost entirely dominated by conservatives like Gil Robles, Alejandro de la Torre Vélez and Nicasio Sánchez Mata.

[144] Written in very aggressive language quite untypical for public disputes between academics of the era, they denounced Gil as a reactionary intending to galvanize the long dead Middle Ages; Unamuno lambasted his opponent as "inepto, mediocre y indocto" and his address as "sudado, artificioso, falso, manera y no estilo".

[149] Defunct By the end of his life Gil emerged as key Traditionalist thinker and gained a prestigious scholarly position;[150] however, he did not make it to the top elite of Spanish law academics, as certified by his failures to obtain a chair in Madrid.

During revival of the Carlist doctrine in the late Francoist era its key theorists focused on de Mella and referred to Gil casually,[154] though he was acknowledged as one of the giants of Traditionalism.

[156] In the current scholarly discourse as a law theorist Gil is classified as 'iusnaturalista" belonging either to the neo-scholastic[157] or neo-thomist school,[158] indebted to Luigi Taparelli, José Prisco[159] and Luis Mendizabal Martín.

In a very recent historiographical synthesis of the theory he is treated marginally;[177] some see him as merely a "sistematizador" of earlier thought;[178] others view him as a theorist who re-modeled the ideology[179] and one of the all-time Traditionalist greats.