You are hereForums / Genealogy Research / BEATRIZ LOPEZ DE FUENLLANA Y SU ABUELA MATERNA

BEATRIZ LOPEZ DE FUENLLANA Y SU ABUELA MATERNA

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/lafamilia/nuestrosranchos.com/sites/all/modules/mailhandler/mailhandler.module on line 123.

By jrefugioghermosillo - Posted on 17 February 2018

Hola prim@s,

This is the 10 Jul 1607 testamento of Beatriz Lopez de Fuenllana, widow of Alonso de Robalcava:
Testamento de Beatriz Lopez de Fuenllana

She identifies her parents as Juan de Baeça and Ysabel Perez, vecinos de Patzcuaro, and her legitimate children as (in order that she names them):

- Mateo de Robalcava
- Alonso de Robalcava
- Francisco Gonzalez (ya difunto, cc Ana de la Paz en Ciudad de Mexico)
- Fulgencio Gonzalez
- Mariana Gonzalez cc Martin Peres
- Beatriz Lopez cc Lorenço Marques
- Ysabel de Todos Los Santos monja profesa, convento de Nra Señora de Gracia
- Francisca de San Clemente monja profesa, convento de Nra Señora de Gracia
- Ursula Gonzalez cc Gabriel Lopes
- Maria Gonzalez cc Pedro de Huerta

She says, when she and Alonso married, neither brought anything into the marriage, I guess, meaning she received no dote. She also explains that when their sons married, they gave them nothing, but their daughters received cartas de dote, including the 2 who entered the convent.

FRAY DIEGO DE FUENLLANA

While scrounging through the archives of the Inquisicion in Mexico, I located 2 procesos against her brother, Fray Diego de Fuenllana, both for “solicitar” (i.e. seducing women in his congregation). The first on 03 Jan 1583:
Proceso contra Fray Diego de Fuenllana 1583

And again 10 Jul 1617:
Proceso contra Fray Diego de Fuenllana 1617

The 1583 proceso gives info about Fray Diego’s birth - he was born in Cuyseo (Cuitzeo), Mich, around 1546. It also includes a partial limpieza de sangre (image 125):

He says his father, Juan de Baeça was natural de Patzcuaro, where he served as magistrato. As for his mother, Ysabel Perez, I can’t make out the name of her birthplace. Anybody?

Unfortunately, he never knew his grandparents, so he didn’t know their names, except for his maternal grandmother: BEATRIZ DE TORRES. The missing piece! She would be the wife of conquistador Francisco de Santaella, I can’t make out the name of her birthplace. He also names a brother of his mother, Diego del Castillo, minero en el Fresnillo.

Fray Diego names his siblings and the spouses of his sisters. This is the family group of Juan Lopez de Baeza and Ysabel Perez de Santaella, in the order that Fray Diego names them. I’ll list him first, since I don’t know his place, only his age:

- Fray Diego de Fuenllana, b. 1546
- Fray Gaspar de Baeza, Fraile de San Agustin
- Miguel Lopez de Fuenllana (looks like “en Peru”? Anybody?
- Juan Lopez de Fuenllana, mynas de Chiametla? Anybody?
- Catalina Lopez de Fuenllana muger de Alo de Lupiana en la Villa de Çamora
- Beatriz Lopez muger de Alo de Robalcava en el Nuevo Reyno de Galicia
- Ysabel del Castillo muger de “Orozco”? en Çamora
- Francisca Lopez muger Alo de Vargas en Çamora
- Petronila Lopez muger de Cristobal Ramirez en Çamora

We finally have the name of Francisco de Santaella’s wife, Beatriz de Torres. “Castillo” is new to me, as far as this FG. Good lead, for anyone researching that surname in Fresnillo.

Saludos!
Manny Diez Hermosillo

i agree with Manny Diez that the timeline is a little off. But I believe the issue is that "Fray Diego's age is "overestimated," just like he said was possible. All the other dates seem to fit nicely with the timeline when considering the dates of the grandchildren’s marriages and deaths.

I already had the information on Francisco de Santaella’s father in law and mother in law, even that the father in law used the two surnames Castillo and Torres, and that the mother in laws name is Leonor Perez. What I didn’t have was the name of Francisco Santaella’s wife, which Manny has now provided.

The only thing slightly off is Fray Diego's given age which is only a ballpark number given many decades later. We have come across many instances where the age given many decades later is a little off from the real age that we discover when we find records closer to their birth.

Thanks Manny and everyone for all your work,

Rick A. Ricci

My theory theory is that Geronimo de Orozco, let's call him the first (I), who was married to Isabel del Castillo, is different than the Geronimo de Orozco, let's call him the second (II), who was married to Isabel de Castaneda. I *think* that the Geronimo's might be a generation apart and different people altogether. There are two facts that help this theory:

1. We know that Geronimo de Orozco (I) and Isabel del Castillo were a couple and were living in Zamora as early as November 9, 1580 given that Isabel del Castillo (mujer de Geronimo de Orozco) voted no in the petition to have the Franciscan order take administrative charge of the church of Zamora. You can find Isabel del Castillo voting no here.

2. Manny points out that a "dote" was granted to Maria de Orozco a daughter of Geronimo de Orozco (I) and Isabel del Castillo in 1614. This dote was gifted to Maria as an "obra pia" since she qualified for it. The primary qualification for the "dote" was that the recipient be an orphan. Here's the link to the dote.

The children that Geronimo de Orozco (I) and Isabel del Castillo started marrying around the 1610s, so they were born around 1580s-1590s. While the children that Geronimo de Orozco (II) and Isabel de Castaneda were being born around the 1610s. Not to mention that if Geronimo de Orozco (1) remarried, Maria de Orozco would not have received the dote.

My two cents,

Daniel Serna Valencia

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Navigation

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 3 guests online.

Languages