A RURAL HIDALGO OF THE 18TH CENTURY: SIR FRANCISCO COSTILLA ZAMBRANOS FROM VILLAFÁFILA (ZAMORA)

The hidalgo Don Francisco Costilla Zambranos [1] (Villafáfila 1715-1788) may be representative of the small rural nobility of the 18th century in the region of Tierra de Campos, in which his place of birth, his neighborhood, his relationships families and their main political and economic activities.

In the parish archive of San Pedro de Villafáfila, where he was born, a baptism certificate is preserved in which the following text transcribed by Granja appears:

“On April 5, one thousand seven hundred and fifteen years, I, the undersigned curate of the Parroquial of Mr. Sn. Pedro desta Vª., I baptized and named a boy named Francisco Ventura, legitimate son of Dn. Jerónimo Costilla and Ms. Theresa Zambranos; they were his godparents Dn. Francisco Costilla Zepeda, grandfather of the baptized person, and Dña Manuela de Olmos, vºs. of this village. He was born on the twenty-seventh day of March and since it is true, I sign it dho. day above.

 Thirso Bueno Bara” [2] .

Your Ancestors .

Don Francisco Costilla brings together in his person several genealogical lines of noble families from the same Villafáfila and from other towns in the Tierra de Campos region to which I will try to make an approximation, noting the phenomenon of marriages between people belonging to the privileged classes of the surrounding towns.

( Fig. 1 Ancestors of Francisco Costilla PDF )

His father, Don Jerónimo Costilla Pérez , son of Don Francisco and Doña Ana, was baptized in 1692 in the same parish of San Pedro, like his brothers, from where his uncle Don Jerónimo Pérez del Concejo is a priest, from 1680 to 1712.

He began soon in the performance of municipal offices, being elected alderman in 1710, 1714, and mayor in 1713 and 1734.

In 1714 he married Doña Teresa Zambranos Treslago, 17 years old, in the parish of San Pedro. Her first-born son, our character, was born in 1715, another man Pedro, in 1716, and in 1718 Teresa died at the age of 21 as a result of the birth of her son Jerónimo, who barely survived a few days.

Don Jerónimo remarried Catalina de Olmos in 1721, I think from the area of ​​Urueña or Villanueva de los Caballeros, and from this new marriage he had several children.

Don Jerónimo dies in 1735, is buried in San Pedro and leaves in his will the charge of saying 500 masses for his soul.

His mother, Doña Teresa Zambranos , was the daughter of Don Pedro Zambranos, a nobleman from Urueña who had married Francisca de Treslago Costilla in 1696, a wealthy heir to Villafáfila on the part of her father José de Treslago, and a cousin of Jerónimo on the part of his mother, Beatriz Costilla. For this reason, the parents of our hidalgo had to obtain episcopal dispensation for the wedding.

Teresa's mother had died at the age of 22, when the girl was only one year old and her father, Don Pedro, remarried Manuela de Olmos and they had several children. Through this maternal line, he inherited all the assets of his grandfather, Mr. José de Treslago, who also died at the age of 24, in which the inheritances of the Barrio and the Almanzas fell, two families with roots in the town and recognized nobility, with very good farms. Both of hers, her grandfather and her mother, had been survived by her great-grandmother, Doña Francisca de Barrio Briceño (1624-1701), managing her family assets.

Therefore, the young Teresa contributed half of her great-grandparents' inheritance to her marriage to Jerónimo (the other half was inherited by the children of Andrés Ruiz Bamba, another nobleman from Villafrechós who had married in Villafáfila).

She is buried in the church of San Martín, in the family chapel of the Barrios of which she was the patron saint, founded in the 16th century by Pedro de Barrio, el Perulero, with the riches he had achieved on his American adventure.

The influence of his ancestors in the municipal politics of Villafáfila is traced in numerous notarial and municipal documents. I expand the profile of his two grandparents, two foreign hidalgos, who, since their settlement in the town as a result of their marriages with rich heiresses, did not cease to have great preponderance in the life of the town in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

D. Francisco Costilla Cepeda :

In 1665 Don Francisco Costilla Cepeda, a young hidalgo from Valderas (son of Bartolomé Costilla and Ana Cepeda) married María Calderón, a wealthy widow from Villafáfila, known by the nickname of La Calderona , as the famous actress of the 17th century, lover of Felipe IV. María Calderón's first husband had been Sebastián Blanco, a relative of the Holy Office, who died in 1652, inheriting a large part of his assets.

Don Francisco's chivalry must have been notorious because, unlike in other cases of new neighbors, the council does not present him with a lawsuit for chivalry to prove it in the Royal Chancery. He soon began his career in the city council and was elected alderman in 1667 and mayor in 1678. That same year María Calderón died, leaving her hacienda, land and cattle to her husband with the charge of saying 60 masses every year for the soul of her

At the beginning of the following year, Don Francisco married Ana Pérez del Concejo in Valladolid, daughter of Alonso Pérez del Concejo, rapporteur of the Real Chancillería Valladolid, originally from Villafáfila, where they moved to live in the parish of San Pedro, whose parish priest he was Ana's brother. They have abundant offspring, they baptize 12 children, three of whom die as children.

He continued to hold the positions of alderman and mayor for the noble state for several years, and in 1710 he was lieutenant of the town's mayor and revenue steward of the Marquis of Tábara, lord of Villafáfila.

Don Francisco died in 1715, the same year his grandson was born, leaving in his will a mandate of 1,000 masses for his soul, and he is buried in the parish of San Pedro, in the altar of Santa Lucía, where his wife's family , the Pérez Concejo, had a grave endowed.

Doña Ana, younger, died in 1729, leaving 2,000 reales for masses for her soul. She names her children Jerónimo, Alonso, who receives the link from María de Santa Cruz, and Francisco, who receives an improvement in her mother's will, as executors.

The fate of his children is uneven, the eldest, Alonso (b.1680), who is elected alderman in 1702, goes to live in Valderas, surely in charge of his paternal inheritance. Francisco (b.1689) appears as alderman in Villafáfila in 1708, 1712 and 1716 and mayor in 1713, before moving to Valderas. Pedro (b.1694) in 1721 goes to America in the entourage of the bishop of Cartagena de Indias, as a servant of the prelate. José (b.1696) has some land in 1752 in Villafáfila, according to data from the Ensenada Cadastre, but I have not traced his fate.

Two of his sons stay and have children in Villafáfila: Jerónimo (b.1692) and Cayetano (b.1700).

Don Pedro Zambrano:

Originally from the Terracampina town of Urueña, he arrived in Villafáfila at the end of the 17th century and married a 20-year-old girl belonging to the oldest families in Villafáfila, Doña Francisca de Treslago Costilla in 1696, who died within two years of a miscarriage, leaving a small daughter, Teresa Zambranos. Pedro remarries Manuela de Olmos, from whom he has seven daughters and two sons.

He is elected alderman and mayor for the noble state on different occasions, the first the same year of his marriage. Nor does the council move him to a lawsuit to demonstrate his nobility, for which he should be notorious, or provide a previously won record.

His estate in the town was that of his wife, administering it in the name of his daughter, until her husband administers it due to her marriage, but from very early on we know that Don Pedro owned a flock of sheep, whose number amounted to 577 sheep in 1699 .

In 1715, several residents of the town filed a lawsuit against him that reached the Royal Chancery [3] :

"because he lends bread with usury and has entered the vineyards with the cattle before finishing harvesting" ; It is said that he is “naturally rough and fearsome, and foul-mouthed with priests and seculars and married women” and that he owns three herds of rams and sheep with more than 1,600 heads.

He died in 1734 leaving 500 masses for his soul and is buried in the church of San Pedro. His daughters marry noblemen from Villafáfila, Revellinos and Villafrechós.

Life, family and property of Don Francisco Costilla.

We hardly know any information about Don Francisco's childhood and youth. Orphaned from a very young age, he would live in his father's house, living with the other son of his first marriage, Pedro, and with those born by his father with his new wife, Doña Catalina de Olmos: Luís (b.1722), Teresa (b.1723 ), Francisca Antonia (b.1724), Jerónimo (b.1725 - +1727), Lucía (b.1726), Jerónimo (b.1729), Pablo (b.1730), José (b.1731) and Mª. Manuela (b.1734). The fact of being the eldest son and having determined the right to inherit a large part of the family estate by way of entailment had to confer him a status of primacy within his siblings, creating misgivings and rivalries that would become, over the years, manifest enmities. He surely received studies outside the town, possibly in Valladolid, where they maintained family ties.

  The 1930s brought him many novelties. In 1732, Doña Beatriz Costilla, her maternal great-grandmother, who administered the Treslago inheritance, died, leaving in her will 1,200 reales for masses and a foundation for an annual mass on Saint Joseph's Day in the parish of Santa María. In 1734 Don Pedro Zambranos, his maternal grandfather, died, inheriting the corresponding part of his estate. In 1735 Don Jerónimo Costilla, his father, died, so Don Francisco inherited the assets linked to the mayorazgo, which included the family home, so his stepmother and her brothers moved to live in the collation of San Salvador. .

He married at the age of 21 in 1737 with Teresa, daughter of D. Miguel Represa and Dª. Teresa Pérez de Mena, noblemen from Villafrechós, where they got married. The ceremony of the vigils took place in the parish of San Pedro de Villafáfila, and this is stated in the departure of his file:

"Year one thousand seven hundred thirty-seven

Dan. Francisco Costilla and Dna. Theresa Dam.

On the twentieth of February of this year one thousand seven hundred and thirty seven Belé and received the blessings of the church Dn. Francisco Costilla and Dª Theresa Represa Mena and signed it.

 Dan. Joseph Ossorio” [4] .

As Don Francisco will declare in his will, his wife contributed to the marriage as a dowry and inheritance, assets worth 22,000 reais.

That same year he was appointed alderman of Villafáfila for the first time by the noble state.

From this marriage the following children were born: Mª Teresa (1738-1749), Alonso (1740-1741) Catalina (1742-1751), Teresa (b.1745) Margarita (b.1747), Bernardo (b.1753) Antonia ( n.1756), Francisco Miguel (b.1758), Ramón (b.1762) and Antonio (b.1764).

( Fig. 2 Children of Don Francisco Costilla. PDF )

From the Land Registry of the Marquis of Ensenada, carried out in January 1752 in order to have a precise knowledge of the income of all the inhabitants of the Crown of Castile, we know the hacienda of Don Francisco Costilla in Villafáfila [5], which had an abundant herd, mainly wool, and a large number of urban and rural estates. Sheep farming was made up of: 1,100 sheep, 430 rams and 610 lambs, with a production of 171 arrobas of wool; He also had four pairs of farm oxen, three horses for the same purpose and four donkeys. He declares nine free-range pigs, surely for slaughter, which gives an idea of ​​the type of diet of the family, which included, in addition to his wife and two daughters aged 7 and 5, two domestic servants, four farm workers, and ten shepherds.

The assets located in Villafáfila were made up of various estates, some linked to entailment, that is, they could not be sold and had to be transferred to the eldest son, and other free assets. According to his statements:

-The Almanza link, founded at the end of the 16th century by D. Diego de Almanza, a hidalgo who became a cleric late after becoming a widower, and was a priest of Bretó de la Ribera: which was made up of 69 cereal farms and an extension of 279 bushels and a half. He had a charge of 50 annual masses in the church of Santa María, at a cost of 100 reais. This estate came from the Treslago Almanza branch and had come to him through his maternal grandmother, Doña Francisca Treslago.

-A linked inheritance, instituted by D. Jerónimo Pérez Concejo, a priest who had been from San Pedro de Villafáfila, the parish with the highest income, brother of his paternal grandmother, Ana, who left his inheritance to the father of our character, Don Jerónimo Rib. Several lines of family inheritance had fallen to the priest, among others that of a great-uncle of his, Mr. Amaro Pérez Santa Cruz, who had also been a priest of San Pedro for more than forty years.

It consisted of 46 cereal farms of 197 bushels and a half, in addition to a two-story house 8 yards high by 12 yards long, where the family lived with an estimated annual income of 60 rls per fleece. It was located in the parish of S. Pedro " on the street that goes to Villaveza”, bordered streets on three sides and the house of Antonio Ledesma on the Levante side. It was located in what today corresponds to three urban estates between the streets of La Viña, La Vendimia and the Villalpando road. A panera also belonged to this link in the same parish at the beginning of what is now Calle del Sacramento, with an estimated rent of 30 rls; and a winery with a wine press and a cave, with two vats, located in the San Martín collation, bordering the Marquis Palace to the east and Calle del Concejo to the north. It corresponds to the winery known until a few years ago as D. Ramón Costilla, currently included in the park attached to the Plaza Mayor. Rent of 60 rls of fleece.

These goods had the charge of giving shelter to the religious of San Francisco, when they passed through the town, as it was an obligatory passage for those who went from Santiago to Salamanca, this charge being estimated at a cost of about one hundred reais a year.

-El Vínculo de las Beatas, created in the middle of the 16th century by two single sisters, nieces of the archpriest of Villafáfila. There were 9 cereal farms of 36 fanegas on which weighed a load of 5 prayed masses and one sung with an offering of six loaves of bread, six candles and six maravedís of wine, all with an annual expense of 20 reais.

-Link of the Board of Trustees of San Antonio Abad. It is a religious foundation from the end of the 15th century, located in the parish of Santa María, with the charge of 10 annual masses and 14 rooms as a flat for the priest, with the right of presentation of that patronage. Consisting of 6 cereal farms, of about 11 fanegas.

Finally, he had free assets, the result of unrelated inheritances. They consisted of three buildings: a house in the parish of San Pedro, ten yards high by 12 long with an annual income of 40 rls per fleece; a bread basket in S. Juan, six yards high by eight long, with a rental value of 30 rls, and a small house on the street that goes to San Andrés, 3 yards tall by six long, worth 10 reais for rent; in an enclosure outside the town, a dovecote and a tile, with 50 and 20 rls respectively. Outside the town and in the place called La Venta, at the crossroads of the Toro village with the Otero and Villalpando roads, an inn with 600 rls rent with the charge of paying the council 100 reais a year for selling wine, barley and straw. In addition, it had 58 farms, preferably cereals, which produced 196,

D. Francisco Costilla also received in kind 4.5 ochavas from Juan Pira and 4 bushels from D. Fernando Díaz, both from Villafáfila, all barley. The following charges weighed on the listed assets: four censuses, for a principal value of 7,200 rls, in favor of the ecclesiastical council, D. Miguel Moro and the orphans of San Agustín del Pozo and San Salvador. A forum of 1 bushel of barley to the chapel of the Barrios.

He also had a charge of three hundred reales a year that he had to pay to his brother Pedro Costilla, who had joined the Benedictine order, for the renunciation of half of the free assets that would have corresponded to him by inheritance.

In summary, his declared assets were:

-urban farms: three houses worth 110 rls of fleece; two bread baskets with 60 rls; a warehouse of 60 rls; a dovecote and a roof tile 70 rls and finally, an inn that would give an income of 620 rls Total 920 rls;

 -rural farms: 188 lands, with a total extension of 726 bushels (206.91 current Ha).

- Herds of sheep that amounted to more than two thousand heads with their annual production of wool and lambs.

All of which adds up to 1,874 reais of fleece, a bushel of barley, 6 loaves of bread, 6 candles and 6 mrs. of wine in kind.

Another of his lucrative activities, which is not mentioned in the cadastral records, was that of lender to various residents of the town and surrounding towns, as can be deduced from the multiple grain and money obligations in his favor. appear in the notarial records preserved.

During his marriage Don Francisco increased and improved his assets, which he records in his will:

 “ I declare that during the marriage with the deceased these houses were built, the upstairs warehouse, the bread basket, the inn and three hawthorns . ”

He built an inn called La Venta de Costilla, before 1752, at the intersection of La Vereda de Toro a Benavente with the road from Otero to Villalpando, to take advantage of the passage of passers-by (reapers, dealers, pilgrims,...) through the route from Benavente to Toro. He made various exchanges of goods with individuals and with ecclesiastical institutions such as the Moreruela monastery, to form a large fenced hawthorn to the west of the town, between La Laguna de San Andrés, the Camino del Espino, La Vellosina and Alameda. Between 1752 and 1761 Don Francisco exchanged a piece of land with the rectory of San Pedro and another with the Cabildo de Benavente [6]. Around 1760 he built a new house on Calle de Rejadarada (the current house of Los Trabadillo and that of Ferreras), adding to an old house that he already owned, another that he bought. The situation of this new domicile, straddling the parishes of San Pedro and Santa María, gave rise to a lawsuit over tithes between both parish priests, according to what appears in Book 23 of the Parish Archive, corresponding to the Baptized of Santa María of 1769 :

“in the secretary of the chamber of Don Francisco de Cos González, in Valladolid, for the sentence that I won on the tithes of the house of Don Francisco Costilla, because half of it was in the territory of Santa María, having added a house that they call the new ” .

As a demonstration of his nobility, he had the coat of arms of the Costillas engraved on the main doors of the mayorazgo houses, which is described to us by a testimony from 1815:

“before the main doors of the mayorazgo house that Don Gaspar Costilla enjoys and owns, he proceeded to recognize the coat of arms that is engraved on them, which forms a fairly wide circle, and in it two mounted knights, and to their sides other infants on which one can see another with four abes that cannot be deciphered due to the darkness in which the weather has put them, and above all a crowned portrait surrounding everything by a chain with bulging rings at the top from which six sashes descend in figure of ribs with silver varnish also quite dark” [7] .

In 1762, his 15-year-old daughter Margarita married Don García Gómez-Cossío y Bobadilla, a rich 19-year-old hidalgo from Sahagún de Campos, where they moved to live.

In 1769 his wife died, as recorded in the book of the dead of the parish of Stª. Mary:

“On January 2, 1769, I, D. Antonio San Juan, priest of the San Martín Parish in this town of Villafáfila, with license from Dn. Juan Gutiérrez, priest of Santa María del Moral of said Villa, gave an ecclesiastical burial in said parish of Santa María to Dª Theresa Represa, wife of D. Francisco Bentura Costilla, revived the sacraments and made a will, in which he left a thousand masses for his soul, outside of those that could celebrate at his funeral and offices as in each year, the priests that can be seen in the region. Also twelve religious of the three Religions. He left as heirs D. Bernardo, D. Francisco Miguel, D. Manuel Ramón, D. Antonio, whom he improved in third and fifth, for being the youngest, and Dª Margarita and Dª Antonia Costilla his children; Likewise, it was his last wish that his burial be endowed, the one that was his will, was in front of the marble of the chapel that today is Our Lady of the Rosary and before it was of San Miguel. D. Antonio de San Juan and Cavada.

That will and burial endowment were fulfilled, which was judicially appraised at five hundred rls; those delivered by D. Francisco Costilla, as it will cost in the accounts given by D. Juan León in the year 1771 and the deed so that in the office of Manuel de Vitacarros, the date of it in the year 1976” [8] .

We must point out that his daughter Teresa does not appear in the death certificate due to the priest's forgetfulness.

We do not know what Doña Teresa's reasons were for not being buried in the tomb of her husband's ancestors in the San Pedro parish church, or in the Barrio chapel in San Martín, where she had buried several daughters; Possibly they were related to the personal devotions of the deceased towards the Virgen del Rosario, in whose chapel she ordered a new grave to be provided, or with the desire not to share her last plot of land with her husband's relatives in one of the graves that they already had provided. from old. The current location of the burial is not certain, perhaps it corresponds to the one that today is located in front of the altar of Nª Srª de las Angustias, in the nave of the Gospel. This church was enlarged at the back at the beginning of the 20th century and then floorboards, so it is to be assumed that the tombstone had to be moved under the choir, where it is now. The preserved inscription contains the following:

"Here lies Dna, Teresa Represa, woman who belonged to D. Francisco Costilla 1769" .

Actions in municipal politics.

The Villafáfila regiment in the 18th century was made up of two mayors and four aldermen, half for each state, noble and general, and a general attorney and a mayordomo of owns, and towards the middle of the century the figure of the deputy of the common was introduced .

The elections to annually renew the positions of justice and regiment have always been subject to controversy, since it was usual for the outgoing ones to try to perpetuate their relatives and close friends in the positions.

In addition, in the 18th century, the families of noblemen were very few and they were in conflict, so elections were almost continuously appealed to the court of the Royal Chancery of Valladolid.

In 1737, the same year that Don Francisco married, at the age of 22, he was already elected as alderman of the noble state and in 1738 he was elected mayor of said state, repeating again in 1743 with the vote of all the electors.

In the year 1744 all the electors, including don Francisco, voted for mayor of the noble state to don Fernando Díaz, and of the good men to José Mateos older in days , so apparently harmony was present in the City Council.

The following year's elections were already controversial, on Saint John's Day, the traditional date of the election since medieval times, there was a tie vote and they were repeated on Saint Peter's Day. Mr. Francisco Costilla left with the vote of three of the four voters present: José Mateos, Mr. Francisco Caballero and Antonio de Ledesma, and with the protest of Mr. Fernando Díaz, stating Costilla's incompatibility for having left the mayor the previous year and therefore not having a vacancy, as the fact that three years had not elapsed since a previous appointment was called, and he voted for Mr. Cayetano Costilla. While the claim was being resolved before the Royal Chancery, the rod of justice of the hidalgos was kidnapped in the hands of don Cayetano Costilla, don Francisco's uncle, and at that time lieutenant of corregidor,

After the elections of the year 1746 Don Francisco was appointed with the vote of all those present, except that of his uncle Don Cayetano. In 1747 he was elected mayor again, in an unusual situation of repetition of the position. The following year Don Francisco Caballero and José Mateos García were elected as mayors, but in 1749 Don Francisco Costilla was elected as mayor again, without respecting the gap or the cadence of three years between two consecutive elections for the same office.

Inbreeding in municipal offices, which can already be traced back to the 16th century, reached its greatest heights at this time, since in 1750 Don Francisco Costilla and Don Fernando Díaz were appointed aldermen of hidalgos. The following year don Miguel Díaz, son of don Fernando, is elected noble mayor.

In 1752 our character was appointed alderman again with 4 votes from the electors and with the protest of Don Miguel Díaz and Don Francisco Caballero:

 “for having two lawsuits pending with this town and having left the year 51 as alderman and having a third of the alcabala to satisfy the coffers and the tax records of the year of zinquenta” .

That year neither of the two noble aldermen took office, and in the following three years he could not be part of the city councils.

In the elections of 1756, two of the electors voted for don Francisco for alderman with the protest of the mayor don Fernando Díaz and his son don Tirso, who was also alderman [9] .

As his political enemies, the Diaz family, had settled in the regiment, in 1757 Don Francisco appealed to the Chancery to hold the elections for that year within the second day after receiving a Royal Provision in that regard. , and if not, that the officers of justice of the year 54 be reinstated in their offices, and if any had died, that it be the one of the previous year. When his rivals found out about the appeal to the Chancellery:

 “They cautiously anticipated executing the aforementioned elections on the thirteenth day, but continuing with the same partiality that they have had since the year 51 to this part, having appointed fathers to sons, brothers to brothers and relatives to relatives, expressly contravening the Royal Laws by good governance chapter left by the Residence Judge on this matter”.

In his argument, he states that Don Miguel Díaz, being mayor, should not have appointed or elected Don Tirso Díaz his brother, and that in 1755 Don Fernando Díaz was mayor, in 1756 his son Don Miguel, and in 1757 his son Tirso. He therefore requests that these electors be excluded for their manifest bias and that the closest royal justice or judge of letters be appointed to preside over the new elections.

The corresponding Chamber of the high court dictates a Royal Provision on July 14 so that the voters of Villafáfila's offices of justice:

 “ Within the second day, the elections are gathered and carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Laws of the Kingdom, agreed orders, uses and good customs, and passed without executing it, leave their respective jobs and continue in them the officers of justice that were in the year of fifty-four, and having died someone, the one who was in the antecedent " .

 Two days later, our man requests with her the town clerk Enrique García Orduña, who states that he accepts her, despite the fact that the election has already been made since the 13th of that month, and with her he exhorts past voters, who They also state that the new election has already been made.

He appears before the other clerk, Manuel de Vitacarros, so that he can testify to the elections held, for which they have the three keys of the municipal archive brought, one was held by the clerk, another by Don Tirso Díaz, a noble mayor, and another by the attorney general. Through the notarial testimony, it is declared that on July 13, Mr. Tirso Díaz, brother of the previous mayor, and Manuel García Fernández, had been elected as mayors of both states, and Mr. Juan Manuel Tazón, who was mayor, as aldermen of the noble state. from the town, and to Don José Costilla, brother of Don Francisco, but with whom he had bad relations; and for the general status to Julián Trabadillo and José Prieto; Francisco Mateos was chosen as Attorney General. With the scribe's document, don Francisco resorts again to Valladolid to invalidate it and that the offices be kidnapped, making a new election. For this, he obtains a new Royal Provision in which those who had held the positions of justice and regiment in the year 1756 are ordered to name the new offices again and arrange them according to law.

It was another controversial and protested election that was held on April 30, 1758 and Mr. José Costilla and Manuel García Fernández were elected as mayors; don Cayetano Costilla, minor, (cousin of don Francisco) and don Juan Orduña noblemen aldermen, and Juan de Soto and Julián Lanseros aldermen for the farmers; and as Attorney General Francisco Mateos. For his part, Mr. Fernando Díaz presented a new appeal before the Foreign Ministry for not agreeing with it [10] .

With so much recourse to the courts, Don Francisco Costilla managed to return to the consistory and we find him as mayor in February 1765 [11] .

In the elections corresponding to the year 1766, Mr. Bernardo Costilla Represa, son of Mr. Francisco, a 13-year-old boy, was elected as alderman and did not take office until December 31, that is, the eve of the new elections, because he was absent in studies, in Sahagun. As mayor for the noble state, Don José Costilla, half brother of Don Francisco, was appointed. Our man tried to continue influencing the appointments and pressured his brother to proceed to make the election at his convenience:

"Don Francisco and Doña Teresa Represa called Don José's wife and after several acts of violence told her that, since she did not want to follow their opinions, they would bring, as they did, their son Bernardo de Sahagún and that they would give him the appointment despite not having a legitimate age, disturbing the City Hall room ”.

Likewise, in the testimonies it is stated that Don Francisco managed various electors, such as Tirso Trabadillo, bringing him in his company to Valladolid, Don Manuel Orduña who served him as a servant, and that he had pressured Diego de Muélledes to elect those who he wanted and got his son Bernardo chosen, even though he was no more than 13 years old.

In spite of everything, he continued to be present in the town halls, since in 1774 he became alderman again, and in 1779 mayor.

Lawsuits with other neighbors.

Don Francisco Costilla had numerous lawsuits with different private residents of Villafáfila for various reasons, apart from the political conflicts outlined above, and the lawsuits he had with the town council itself:

 “for having two lawsuits pending with this town and having left the year 51 as alderman and having a third of the alcabala to satisfy in the coffers and the tax records of the year of zinquenta” ;

and another in 1765 together with other sheep farmers from the town with the attorney general of the same, because they were opposed to the leasing of pastures to foreign farmers to obtain their own for the council [12] , and a process that went as far as Council of Castile in Madrid in which it is intended that the town does not charge the neighboring ranchers of the town more than the 6 maravedíes per head of cattle that had been charged since the 16th century [13] .

In the fifties he had a dispute with Bernardino Riesco over wine supply for the town [14] and almost at the end of his days in 1785-1786, he had a bitter lawsuit with his relatives Antonio and José Ruíz, also on purpose of differences by grasses [15] .

But the dispute that has left us with the most documentation and allows us to know the attitudes of our character in handling the affairs of the town, is the one with Antonio Rodríguez Silvano, a saltpeter manufacturer, originally from Benavente, who in 1779 obtained the Title and Royal Certificate of nitrate manufacturer in Villafáfila. A few years before, a small factory had been established to make saltpeter in the town, which was later sold to make gunpowder [16] . With the arrival of this new manufacturer in the town, conflicts with the justice system and with other neighbors soon arose due to the animosity of many towards the factory and the manufacturer, which until then had not been revealed.

The first conflict of which we have documentary evidence took place, even before it was established in the town, with Don Francisco Costilla, the richest and most influential neighbor of Villafáfila who, according to the Zamora Salt Income Administrator:

“In the Campos district, he is one of the most landowners, litigant and very unruly neighbors... and because of his power, discretion and disposition, he has subjugated those neighbors” .

When Don Francisco was mayor of Villafáfila in 1779, he had brought proceedings against Silvano for fencing off some vineyards and one of his own, without permission from the courts:

 “Under the influence of Don Francisco, the Deputies of the Common have sued him, for having fenced off some farms and a vineyard of his property and about the closure of the wine tavern that he sold, for saying that he was a foreigner, and for this effect by A few days his establishment was closed, for that reason Silvano has had to go to Zamora and cannot attend the saltpeter factory”.

On June 16, Tomás Cid, who was master of the refined saltpeter factory in Revellinos, and Silvano's nephew, presented himself and his uncle with the Certificate of Preeminence and the Title of Saltpeter for himself and his uncle, so that were completed and recognized by the mayors and aldermen. Those present, presided over by the Mayor, did not object, except for Don Francisco who refused, alleging different formal defects, for not being preceded by a memorial. Silvano appealed to the Administrator of Zamora and he addressed the General Directors of Revenue, in Madrid, and also brought the incident to the notice of Mr. Caballero Mayor of Zamora, who was the highest political authority in the city and province.  

Mr. Miguel García de Bujanda, Administrator and General Visitor of the Salt Flats of Zamora, and General Manager of the Refined Saltpeter Factory Establishments of the Reynos de Castilla y León, in his letter to the General Directors of Revenues, makes a report on Mr. Francisco Costilla describing his attitude:

“in the color of a wealthy man and to whom the others obey out of fear, and that the bara of ordinary mayor for the Noble state alternates for years, as in the past and in the present has been seen, between him and Don Manuel Orduña , his servant, and all those who are not at his disposal, he threatens, despises and insults for his domineering genius, and even perverts the order to resolve in the City Councils, disregarding the Royal Orders” .

In addition, he points out the origin of his resentment towards the factory in the rejection by the Minister of Finance of a request for it to be awarded to his family:

“and as Don Francisco had intended to take over the Saltpeter Factory... he made a representation on September 30, 1776 to the Exm. Mr. Miguel de Murquiz, General Superintendent of the Royal Treasury, at the request of the said factory of said town, leave of certain perpetuity for his house and Mayorazgo and other conditions, which was without effect " .

This rudeness created a state of animosity towards the manufacturers that translated into the promotion of as many obstacles and obstacles as possible against the factory:

 “and the suso said, disaffected to the factory itself, as later verified by his total enemy, since not openly with Manuel Badallo [17] , for hiding for some time his wickedness and malice, now manifested with the nominee Silvano, who, with total contempt for the Royal Certificate of Exemptions, has persecuted, persecuted and annoyed, in such a way that it deprives him of his quietude and seat to attend to the said factory and its overtaking, moving unfair lawsuits before that ordinary xª [justice]” .

The General Directors of Revenues answer from Madrid that the protection of the state should only be applied to activities directly related to the manufacture of saltpeter:

“It seems good to us that the nitrate workers be protected in the cases that occur, always bearing in mind that it must be in those that are purely related to the work of nitrate but not in those that provoke or move them due to their dealings, farms and businesses. ” .

The Mayor of Zamora those days was D. Juan Ignacio Bermúdez de Castro, who initiates a file and appoints a notary to go to Villafáfila to take testimonies on Mayor Costilla's refusal to comply with the Saltpeter Certificate.

As the incumbent administrator, Miguel García de Bujanda, was sick in bed with rheumatic chest pain, Juan Ignacio García de Bujanda, surely his son, took charge of the Administration on an interim basis, and would later succeed him in office. He goes to the town, but in Granja de Moreruela he signs a testimony before the notary there, requesting the Knight Mayor to help him with military troops:

"so as not to expose oneself to obvious danger"

because he has learned that Don Francisco Costilla is currently the mayor of Villafáfila:

"and because of his great management in it, any bad result is fearsome" .

Arrived at Villafáfila, the clerks of the town refused to take the testimonies, and required the Mayor, who at the time was Don Francisco Antonio Prieto Caballero, to intervene:

"Finding himself as his grace, he is a cloak-and-dagger judge . "

But the refusal continues and he has to go to a Benavente notary so that the cars pass before him.

Collect several testimonies in favor of the manufacturer, coinciding that the previous saltpeter:

 "They have not done anything other than exhibit them and show them the Certificate and Title before the City Council, which has subsequently been completed . "

Antonio Alonso Ordás says about the hidalgo:

“That he is the most wealthy and wealthy person in it and for the same reason several neighbors depend on him and for him he manages the most of the Individuals of the City Council of this town and in the matters that said Don Francisco manages, he obtains and achieves as much wants, and if someone gets mixed up in things that harm the meaning of Don Francisco, he in such cases tries to get away with it... that Don Manuel Orduña has been a family servant of the said Don Francisco but not at present, but he enters and leaves frequently in his house and executes and does whatever he is told in it” .

Pedro García also says that he is the richest and:

 “He manages not only the ordinary mayors each in his time, but almost the entire City Council, if anyone opposes his maxims and attempts, he looks at them badly... in the matters that occur in this town outside and inside the City Hall he mixes, and for the same reason he takes out and does justice to whoever he wants and accommodates... he was moved by a certain cause that he should close the wine tavern he sold for saying he was a foreigner”.

Asensio de Muélledes says that he is the richest and most affluent in town and for this reason most of the neighbors depend on him, because he helps them and often gives what they need, and for this reason in the town hall, even if he is not inside, he handles to their capitulants:

"...in most of the issues it is mixed and even in the elections of Justices..."

Pedro del Pozo says that he is the most powerful and richest neighbor in this town and for the same fact he helps several of his neighbors, who for this fact are subject and subordinate to him:

"... over the years he has taken out mayors, aldermen and attorneys at his will."

The testimony of Manuel García Rosinos is less adverse:

"Despite having been the one who declared mayor five or six times, Don Francisco Costilla never tried any business with him . "

Tirso Díaz, who belongs to a family of hidalgos that rivals Costilla, says that by being able to lend and give needy neighbors what they need in emergencies, he manages and has at his disposal for any matter many of the neighbors of that this villa is made up of:

  “That Mr. Francisco Costilla, for being disobedient or foul-mouthed to a mayor who was in this town, named Mr. José de Millana, was formed by him ex officio and after he heard about it, as a powerful man and who has many efforts in all everywhere, he was able to get the gentlemen of the Valladolid crime chamber even without being in a state to call him in the state that he had, and that with effect he remitted, and although it worked out for her, because of the efforts, with all that he came out warned. That many other causes have been put to him by some other neighbors but then they manage to get him to go to the Chancery and because the plaintiffs found themselves with little means they have not been able to go on and have remained in the being and state in which they have gone”.

The Mayor resolved on July 28 and ordered the other ordinary mayor for the general status, Francisco García Vázquez, to accept and order the keeping and fulfillment of the Royal Certificate of Preeminence and Title of Saltpeter in favor of Antonio Rodríguez Silvano, and order Rib to keep it and:

“from now on, restrain Silvano or put him on terms of leaving the factory, under penalty of being liable for the damages caused, and with the warning of informing His Magd”,

Convicting him of the costs of the process.

Don Francisco appeals the sentence and, in his arguments, declares his opposition to both the factory and the ideas of the manufacturer:

 "Bujanda for protecting a restless neighbor who, in order to continue and carry his ideas forward, has taken advantage of this kind of saltpeter factory ",

 Affirming that they have plotted among themselves to:

"to assert his ideas and the entanglements that he has used to make ordinary justice fearsome" .

It seems that the relationship with Don Juan Ignacio García de Bujanda did not end with a manifest enmity, since the treatment they had gave rise to some type of agreement, since we know that in 1783 Don Francisco Costilla sold him a perpetual stewardship of the city of Zamora, which came from don Rodrigo Navarro de Mendoza and had previously acquired the one from Villafáfila [18] .

 But the new times are not conducive to this old hidalgo who sees his arguments rejected. As the appeal did not prosper, his son, Don Bernardo Costilla, filed a request for dismissal of the lawsuit, arguing that his father was an elderly man and that he was sorry for his actions. Two years later he died without having resolved the appeal [19] .

Death and testament of Don Francisco Costilla.

He dictates it on March 20, 1788:

“being bodily ill and in bed affected by an accident of Perlesia [20] taking charge of its results and especially in the advanced age that I am certain that it is the death that I am close to... with my free judgment and understanding” .

After making a profession of faith and belonging to the Catholic Church of Rome, he entrusts his soul to God and commands that his body be buried in the tomb that is in the Church of Saint Peter where his ancestors are buried, dressed in the habit of Saint Francis of the convent of religious observants of the town of Benavente. His ancestral links weigh more on him than the possibility of resting next to the body of his wife in the parish of Santa María, where he had bought the tomb described above.

He orders that the ecclesiastical chapter of Villafáfila, and the communities of the convents of San Francisco de Benavente, Carmen Calzado de Valderas and La Merced de Valdunquillo, "of which I am a brother" and to which he asks that they attend his burial and services. notice is given to them with sufficient time, and that the end of the year is made available to their executors.

He wants to continue demonstrating after his death, through external signs, his supremacy over the other neighbors:

 “I order that Year and Day be offered to me on my grave twice as many as the other neighbors, and I leave this task and care at the disposal of my son Don Bernardo and his wife Doña Ignacia Español, trusting in the zeal and love that he professes for me. I have enough experience . "

He makes a series of pious mandates, such as that on the day of his death mass is said at the privileged altar and 4 reales are paid, and that a thousand masses are said for his soul paying 3 reales each; that after his burial general charity be given to all the poor who attend:

  "and this I leave to the discretion of my executors as to the amount and what everything has to be with respect to my state and possibility . "

He sends to the mendicant orders what is customary and to the sanctuary of Our Lady of the Falifos of Carballeda, located in Rionegro del Puente, an outfit, whatever the approval of the executors.

In the chapter on the distribution of his property among his heirs, he leaves us a testimony of how important it had been to maintain appearances of greater wealth during his life, to obtain better consideration and marry his children with good parties from other towns:

“I declare to avoid discord among my heirs and giving for none and of no value any beneficiary or memorial of property that includes those that I had in power, after the death of the said my wife, that these would be, in my prudent opinion, one hundred twenty thousand reais of value, deducting some debts that he had against himself and in favor of the Jesuits, so that half must be considered the deceased and the other mine, whose declaration I make with the stated purpose and that my children do not use a simple inventory that they say they have found and consists of much more value, because I must confess for the step I am in that an Inbentario was made without authority and only apparent, that is, increased values ​​so that the flow would sound and my children find their accommodations proportionate”.

No wonder the Castilian proverb has left the sentence: “Of money and holiness, half of half” . In the case of our hidalgo, as in the society of his time, appearance was a fundamental value.

In addition, he acknowledges that his wife contributed 22,000 reais to the marriage in dowry and inheritance, so that the assets belonging to his wife would amount to 82,000 reais, adding half of the assets that he declares to possess at the death of his wife. To calculate the improvement of third and fifth that the deceased made to her son Don Antonio, the expenses of funerals, obsequies and burial endowment must be subtracted.

He ratifies the improvement in the third and fifth that he had made of his free assets in favor of his eldest son Bernardo. He sends his son Ramón 100 ducats, his little grandchildren, Pedro Manuel and Gaspara 50 ducats each, and his daughter-in-law Doña Ignacia Español the diamond setting that was given to her when she got married, and after her days be for the eldest granddaughter, Doña Fernanda. He declares that her daughter Margarita who is living in Sahagún, widow of Don García Cossío, has given him more than what she legitimately would have corresponded to.

He states that different residents of this town, places of jurisdiction and other towns in all these surroundings are owing him various amounts of maravedís and grains, so that their executors collect them.

Appoints curator of his 23-year-old son Don Antonio, Mr. Manuel de Nájera, lawyer of the Royal Councils and neighbor of Benavente, nephew of his late wife, and as testamentary executors Mr. Pablo Costilla, priest of San Pedro, his brother , and his eldest sons Don Bernardo and Don Francisco Miguel.

He leaves as universal heirs of the assets that remain after fulfilling everything mandated in the will, his children Don Bernardo, Don Francisco, Don Ramón, Don Antonio and Doña Margarita and Doña Antonia and Doña Teresa, these last two nuns in the convent of San Quirce of Valladolid.

Witnesses in this testament are the mayor, Mr. Alonso de León, Mr. Romualdo Ruíz, the town's doctor, and the surgeon, Ambrosio Fernández.

His illness had not yet completely prevented him because he is capable of signing it.

A few days later, on April 6, 1788, he made a codicil to finish clarifying some matters:

First of all, it declares that the mayorazgo house that it demolished to begin to build the ones that live on those dates:

 “It would be worth a thousand ducats with a short difference and, taking into account that said entailment has no other place in which to live with the comfort or decency that corresponds to it, and that it is obliged to maintain a hospice for the religious of San Francisco, I want and it is My will is that the mayorazgo be left as the suso house leaves it, said of its Room, which is distinguished by being old and tall, since if it is divided, its form and greatness are destroyed, and it is advisable that it be maintained as the first estate and the value that it has more I paid them a thousand ducats from what my son Don Bernardo would have as such successor in the mayorazgo.

I declare that during the marriage with his wife these houses were built, the upstairs cellar, the bread basket, the inn and three hawthorns, and as regards the free assets, livestock and furniture, due to the lack of caval, he ratifies what was said about his estimate, since so is my will.”

To avoid claims from his heirs, he states that a prebend from Valladolid that he should have collected for the deceased:

 "I did not collect it and so that it serves as a disappointment to his heirs because that is my will."

Mr. Nájera, whom he had appointed curator of his young son, has informed him that he cannot fulfill the commission of such curator, because he has an appointment as an accountant, for which he confers the same powers to Mr. Fulgencio Alaíz, a neighbor of the town. of Castrogonzalo.

That day his clinical situation had already deteriorated so much that those who act as witnesses, his brother Don Pablo Costilla, priest of San Pedro, Don Antonio Toral and Don Manuel Gallego, priests and chapter members of the Ecclesiastical Chapter of Villafáfila, are called and prayed for the grantor and his children to sign it as justification of this truth:

“Because the grantor was unable to do so because of the Perlesía accident that he suffers on the entire right side.

I the scribe attest. Felipe de Vitacarros” [21] .

At the age of 73, D. Francisco Costilla died at his home in the parish of San Pedro, after having been a widower for 20 years. This is what his death certificate says:

"D. Francisco Ventura Costilla

On April 6, 1788, after receiving the Holy Sacraments, D. Francisco Ventura, husband q. It had belonged to Dª Teresa Represa, previously deceased, and my parishioners, seven children remained from the express marriage: Margarita, Teresa, Antonia, Bernardo, Francisco, Ramón and Antonio. He made a will before Vitacarros and left for his alvazeas the Hixos of him Dn. Bernardo and D. Francisco Miguel and me the present priest. He was buried in his family's marked grave and must not break

Dan. Paul Rib” [22]

The mayorazgo fell on his son Don Bernardo Costilla, who already lived in his father's house with his family, since he married Ignacia Rodríguez Español, from Nava del Rey. They had several children, and even before his father's death he had abundant cattle, since in 1786 he granted a power of attorney to a Madrid business agent to defend his right to lease the pastures of the Dehesa de Quintos, property of the Duke of Infantado, who had been renting for many winters, before the Honorable Council of the Mesta, "whose guild I want to join" [23]. He declares that he owns three thousand head of sheep, sixty cattle and forty caballerias. He participated in municipal politics from a very young age, inheriting the management of his father. During the years of French occupation, he suffered from requisitions and contributions as the richest neighbor of the town, suffering damage to his assets that led him to reduce the number of masses he had planned for his soul in the will he made in 1810 from 1000 , up to 750 in the one he made in 1813, when he died.

Francisco Miguel was ordained a priest and lived in Villafáfila, where he was vicar of San Pedro and waiting to access the parish upon the death of his uncle Don Pablo Costilla, he died in 1807 while being in Benavente, left as heir to his sister-in-law Doña Manuela Manjón.

Ramón studied Law for two years and one for Canons at the University of Valladolid, but he did not enter the clergy, he returned to Villafáfila and was elected mayor in 1786 and 1789, and a lawsuit was filed over that election by Don Felipe Argenti de Leis, Practicing lawyer in Villafáfila and married to Doña Luisa Díaz, belonging to another hidalgo family with longstanding rivalry with the Costillas. Later, Don Ramón married Doña Manuela Manjón and moved to Barcial de la Loma, Valladolid, where he had to prove his nobility through a lawsuit in 1789, appearing as noble mayor of that town in 1792 [24] .

The youngest of the boys, Antonio, was also ordained a priest, so in 1786 Don Francisco gave him one thousand one hundred reais of annual income from the three thousand that he rented from the Venta he had in the Toro a Benavente village. , until he obtained ecclesiastical income on his own. He entered the Ecclesiastical Chapter of Villafáfila, one of whose portions he enjoyed. In 1805 he died at the home of his brother Francisco Miguel.

Of the lives of his daughters we hardly have any news. The eldest, Margarita, who married Don García Gómez-Cossio y Bobadilla, a hidalgo from Sahagún, a lawyer for the Royal Councils, and holder of several mayorazgos. She was already a widow when her father died and lived in the monastic villa. One of his sons was a Crime Prosecutor at the Valladolid Chancery, and her daughters married noblemen from Castrogonzalo and León. The other two daughters of D. Francisco, Teresa and Antonia, professed as cloistered nuns in the Royal Monastery of San Quirce in Valladolid.

Author:

Elijah Rodriguez Rodriguez.

Brigecio: magazine of studies of Benavente and its lands ,  ISSN  1697-5804,  Nº 21-22, 2011-2012

https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/4186199.pdf.

http://historiasdevillafafila.blogspot.com.es/2014/05/un-hidalgo-rural-del-siglo-xviii-don.html

Photographs:

Elijah Rodriguez Rodriguez.

Jose Luis Dominguez Martinez.

Transcription and montage:

Jose Luis Dominguez Martinez.

All text, photographs, transcription and montage, the rights belong to their authors, any type of use is prohibited without authorization.