|
|
Juan Lujan (abt. 1685 - 1761) Buenaventura "Ventura" Esquivel (abt. 1685 - after 1750) Juana Luján and Buenaventura Esquivel were the parents of our ancestor, Francisco Gómez del Castillo, also
known as Francisco Luján. We know he is Juana’s son from her
will. We have evidence that Juana’s parents, Matías Luján [abt. 1651-after 1716] and Francisca Romero de Salazar [abt. 1660-after 1716], were living in
New Mexico when the Pueblo Indians revolted in 1680 and drove the Spanish out
of New Mexico. The Spanish New Mexicans
mostly fled to Guadalupe del Paso [ The
girl was eight in 1693 when Governor Diego de Vargas made his recruitment list
at Guadalupe del Paso for those willing to return to Juan Antonio Esquivel, his wife, and
their two children were a Spanish family from ...Antonio
de Esquivel, in 1702, warned his younger brother, Ventura, that he, Antonio, would “shame him publically with curses
and make him bite the dirt [morder la tierra]” if he tried to marry Juana Luján, a woman who was not his
equal. Ventura retorted that he would enter the holy state of grace with
whomever he chose, “for first comes my soul, and I do not want the devil to
take me [commit adultery].”
Unfortunate for When
his family tried to force Juana
Luján, daughter of Matías
Luján and Francisca de Salazar,
worked as a cook at the By all
appearances, Salvador Olguín was the
same person of this name who was a son of Juan
López Olguín and Ana María Luján
(ONMF: 244-45). Juan López Olguín
and Ana María Luján were married in
El Paso del Norte on 30 May 1682 (NMR: 1379, DM 1682, May 30, no. 8). Juan López Olguín was a son of Captain Salvador Olguín and Magdalena Fresqui. Ana María Luján was a daughter of Juan Luis Luján and Isabel López
del Castillo. This information indicates that Juana Luján's father, Matías
Luján was also a son of Juan Luis
Luján and Isabel del Castillo. Felipa Manzanares was very likely the person identified as Felipa Sandoval who was a daughter of Antonia de Sandoval y Manzanares (RCR: 60). Antonia Sandoval, mestiza, age 50 (b.ca. 1652) and single, testified in the case of Juana Luján against Buenaventura de Esquibel. Antonia declared she was related to Juana Luján, but did not know how they were related. At this time, the parents of Simón Martín have not been positively identified. Also, testifying on the behalf of Juana Luján was Ana Luján, mestiza, age 45 (b.ca. 1657) and a widow, who declared she was a first cousin of Juana Luján. By all apperances, this Ana Luján is the same person of this name who was listed as the widow with her son Luis Durán in the 1697 cattle distribution census (BB: Book 2, 1143). Juana
named her eldest child Francisco Gómez
del Castillo, using the surname of her paternal grandmother, Isabel del Castillo. We don’t know
where the Gómez came from, although historian Fray Angélico Chávez had a
theory that some or all of Juana’s children was sired by one of the Gómez Robledo men. Francisco was born in 1701 or 1702 in Juana
left the About
1703 Juana moved to the Jacona-San Ildefonso area. Perhaps she wanted isolation from the
troubles of her youth. There were no
other Spanish families there besides that of Don Ignacio Roybal y Torrado [our ancestor], who also had a home in
In
1714 Juana purchased a rancho near Jacona. It was there she reared her
family. About 1720 she married Francisco Martín, but they had no children
together. She became rather wealthy,
involving herself in the trade with the towns of Guadalupe del Paso and
Our ancestor, Don Ignacio Roybal y Torrado,
was a high-ranking Spaniard who owned a rancho adjacent to the Rancho San
Antonio. Despite the difference in
caste, the two families were friendly.
In his will Don Ignacio refers to Juana as his “comadre.”
It is likely that Don Ignacio was asked to be the padrino [godfather] of one of Juana’s
children, perhaps Francisco. That means
that Don Ignacio and Juana shared the special Hispanic Catholic relationship of
compadrazgo. This means conjoined parenthood between
the parent and godparent. That is why in
Spanish compadre or comadre expresses a far deeper
friendship than amigo. Juana and Francisco Martín are shown in the 1750 census in a cluster with Juana’s children. Three daughters of her son, Francisco Gómez del Castillo, and an Indian woman servant were living with Juana and her husband. Francisco Martín died sometime between
1750 and 1762. On page 158 of Volume 1
of The Spanish Archives of New Mexico, is
a document that would appear to fit Francisco
Martín, but is labeled MIGUEL MARTÍN
SERRANO, San Antonio [the name of the rancho upon which Francisco and Juana
lived], will, 1752. Hilario Archuleta, Alcalde; Francisco Gómez del Castillo; Juan Gómez del Castillo. Juana
died in 1761, and her estate entered probate on Felipe Tafoya, as attorney for the
Indians of San Ildefonso, filed a protest with the Governor of The Indians alleged that during the
administration of Governor Pedro Rodriguez Cubero, their old people had loaned
a house lot to Mathias Madrid, in order that he might erect thereon a house;
that not only did he build a house, but
also began to cultivate lands notwithstanding their protests; that finally he
offered to sell the lands to them, but they refused to buy because the lands were
already theirs; that he then sold them to Juana
Luján, whose heirs were still in possession, her son, Juan Gómez [del
Castillo], having built a house so
close to the pueblo that his cultivated land adjoined the garden of the Indians
next to the pueblo; that on the other side of the river and within pueblo
boundaries Marcos Lucero [husband
of a daughter of Francisco Gómez del
Castillo, therefore our uncle], a
citizen of Ojo Caliente, also had
built a house, under the pretext of being an heir of Francisco Luján [aka Francisco
Gómez del Castillo], deceased, [He
really was a son-in-law; it wasn’t a pretext.]; that although it was true that the latter had bought a piece of land of
an Indian of San Ildefonso, the people of the pueblo had made complaint because
of the damage done to their planting lands by the cattle and horses of said Luján and others, and Governor
Francisco Marin had ordered that the Indian should return what he had received
for the land, but the Indian, not being able to do so, an Indian from Tesuque
named Francisco “El Coyote” put up the money by consent of the pueblo, said
Francisco being interested in the lands because he had married a daughter of
the interpreter of the pueblo; that after said Marcos Lucero received the money it had not been possible to get
him to leave the place, and he was still there to the inconvenience and damage
of the Indians; that also west of the pueblo and within the boundaries of the
grant, some of the commons of the pueblo had been granted to Pedro Sánchez [husband of our aunt,
Micaela Quintana], who also had built a house, and although
the Indians protested against this grant at the time it was made, no attention
was paid to them, and they had suffered great injury because of the stock
belonging to Sanchez and that
of other persons who claim title under
said ranch; that in addition one Antonio
Mestas [our uncle], a citizen of
Chama [the Chama Valley as opposed to the later town of Chama] and son-in-law of Sanchez, proposed to establish a ranch on the other side of the
river, opposite the Caja del Rio, at the only place where there is a practical
descent from the Pajarito mesa, etc. In view of all this the Indians
asked relief from the damage they suffered and that their league in three
directions should be protected and given to them. The governor, Cachupín, acted and
commissioned, February 4, 1763, Don Carlos Fernández to examine the grants or
titles under which Matías Madrid had sold to Juana Luján; to measure the distance from the church in the pueblo [San
Ildefonso] to the ranch; to measure also
toward the ranch of Marcos Lucero, ejecting
the latter from the land for which the price had been returned without
permitting him the slightest recourse; to examine the site of the ranch of Pedro Sánchez as to whether it is on
lands which belong or ought to belong to
the pueblo; to notify Antonio Mestas not
to build a house or make a settlement at the only point for a watering place on
the Rio del Norte and to report to the governor what he had done. On February 17, 1763, Fernandez,
chief alcalde of Santa Cruz at the time, made report that he had notified the
heirs of Juana Luján and that they
had exhibited to him a grant given to Matías Madrid by Don Pedro Rodríguez
Cubero, the possession being given him by Roque Madrid with a decree by Don
Juan Paez Hurtado; also a deed by Matías Madrid to Juana Luján, made before Captain
Sebastían Martín [also our uncle], and
re-validated by the inspector, Juan Paez Hurtado; and also a certified copy of
a decision made by the same officer. The alcalde ordered the documents attached
to the proceedings in the case. They are
found on leaves 5 to 9 of the archive in question. On February 17, 1763, Fernandez
measured the distance from the gate of the cemetery in the pueblo, which gate
faced the east, to the boundary of the land claimed by the heirs of Juana Luján, a distance of 2,200 varas [about
6,500 feet, a little over one mile] and
continuing the measurement in the same direction [east] to the boundary which
said heirs recognized as separating them from the lands of the heirs of Ygnacio Roybal, there was a further
distance of 1,650 varas [about 5,000 feet, close to one mile]. This
last boundary was an arroyo, the nearest one to the principal house of Juana Luján. From the measurements it is evident that
the lands claimed by the latter’s heirs were within a distance of 3,850 varas [about
11,550 feet or two miles] from the gate on the east side of the San
Ildefonso cemetery. On the 18th, Fernandez
began at the north wall of the church in San Yldefonso and measured directly
toward the house of Marcos Lucero, and
at a distance of 4,372 varas he came to the boundary of the land claimed by
said “Lucero and other heirs of Francisco
Gómez del Castillo.” Thence continuing the measurement in the same
direction a distance of 628 varas [about 1,900 feet] he arrived at a point 5,000 varas or one Spanish league, from the point
of beginning. This distance took in the
house and all the lands except 61 varas claimed by the heirs of Gómez
del Castillo. These 61 varas reached
the boundary of Juan Esteban Canjuebe, a citizen of While this party who had been
present at this measurement were all together on the lands which had been
purchased by Marcos Lucero [They were purchased by Francisco Luján] under
whom Lucero claimed by right of inheritance[see the protest at the beginning of
the proceedings] the verbal statement was made by the Indian from Tesuque,
Francisco [El Coyote] that from the time he paid the money back to Marcos Lucero, the latter had not
planted the lands, which as a matter of fact were being planted by Francisco,
although Lucero was living in the
house which he had built, not on the
lands purchased, but on those he had inherited. Also on February 18, 1763,
Fernandez began at the western wall of the cemetery of San Ildefonso and
measured west therefrom a distance of 3,200 varas [about 9,600 feet, almost
2 miles] at which point he was north of
the house of Pedro Sánchez. He then
continued the measurement west 1,800 varas further [about 5,400 feet, a
little over a mile] to the end of the
league of 5,000 varas belonging to the pueblo.... On February 20, 1763, the alcalde
summoned before him Antonio Mestas, whom
the Indians had accused of intending to establish a ranch on the other side of
the river at the only place where there was a practical descent from t he
Pajarito mesa. The alcalde informed Mestas of the order of the governor and
Mestas said that he would obey it;
that neither then nor at any time had he intended to settle the place. Having complied with the orders of
the governor, the alcalde returned the papers to him, and the governor sent
them all to the Indians in order that they might make any statement they saw
fit in support of their contention. Felipe Tafoya, as attorney for the
Indians, made answer for them stating that he had examined the grant made to
Matías Madrid by Governor Cubero and also the deed made by Madrid to Juana Luján, and he did not admit the
value of these documents; that he called attention to the decision [see leaf 9
of his archive] in favor of Madrid, dated September 27, 1704, which clearly
showed the justice of his client’s contention, for said decision stated that
the grant made by the Marquis of Naba Bracinas to Ignacio Roybal was made to the injury of the Indians; that that
being true with how much more reason did the Indians claim that they were
injured by the grant made to Madrid, for the measurements made by the alcalde,
Madrid, showed that Fernandez’ grant was further within their boundaries than
that made to Roybal. The answer made by Tafoya and the
other papers were sent to Juan Gómez [del Castillo] and Marcos Lucero, heirs of Juana Luján, on February 28, 1763, for
reply thereto. The reply was signed by Juan Gómez del Castillo. He denies the statement made by Tafoya,
in first presenting the case, that the Indians had loaned the land to Matías
On Following this is an order of The opinion requested is dated
October 27, 1764, and, after a brief review of
conditions existing, amounts only to a suggestion as to the best and
most practicable manner of settling the dispute in an equitable way and without
encouraging the same class of controversies in other pueblos. The licentiate says, in substance,
that the best way to settle the matter would be to give the Indians from the
unoccupied lands on the north and west, an amount sufficient to make up what
they are lacking to complete the full amount to which they were entitled. He also approves the action of the governor
relative to the house which Antonio
Mestas was accused of intending to erect on the land of the Indians and
suggested that monuments should be erected and that the Spanish citizens be
ordered to keep their stock outside of those boundaries under the gravest of
penalties.... At San Ildefonso, on That
the Indians had not pressed their claim until after Juana’s death suggests a good relationship between her and
the CHILDREN OF JUANA LUJÁN [1] Francisco Gómez del Castillo [a.k.a. Francisco Luján], our ancestor, was born about 1701, the son of Juana Luján and Buenaventura Esquivel. He died after 1752 and before 1761. See his biography elsewhere in this work. His heirs inherited his own land and a portion of that of his mother’s Rancho San Antonio. [2] Juan Gómez del Castillo was a son of Juana Luján and an unknown father, perhaps Buenaventura Esquivel. He was born about 1703. He inherited part of his mother’s Rancho San Antonio. He married Antonia Quintana, our aunt, daughter of Miguel de Quintana and Gertrudis Moreno Trujillo. They had four sons and four daughters. All of the Gómez del Castillos of later generations are descended from this couple. They apparently lived out their lives on Juan’s inherited land between Pojoaque and San Ildefonso near Antonia’s sister, Micaela Quintana and her husband, Pedro Sánchez. Juan’s family also lived nearby. In 1750 Juan and Antonia were shown to be a household of six children, six female Indian slaves/servants and one Indian boy. [3] Luisa
Gómez del Castillo was born about 1706, the daughter of Juan Luján and possibly of Submitted by Donald Rivara, June 23, 2009. Copyright © Genealogy Trails All Rights Reserved with Full Rights Reserved for Original Contributor |
