Online Status

Por Salvador94 |

Hola estimados compañeros,

Me gustaría saber si alguien puede informarme sobre la nueva información que he visto donde se establece a Sancha de Velasco, esposa de Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño, como hija de Sancho Sánchez de Velasco y María Enríquez de Lacarra. Según mis notas basadas en estos foros de hace unos años estos datos eran posibles pues no había un documento que lo expresara. Sin embargo vi una publicación reciente en este sitio donde se refieren a Sancha de Velasco con su segundo apellido como de Lacarra, no recuerdo cuál fue pero también hay un árbol genealógico en línea que liga a Sancha de Velasco con esta pareja y como precisamente no son fuentes cien por ciento confiables es que les hago esta pregunta:

¿Está confirmado este parentesco con algún documento encontrado en fecha reciente?

Ahora bien, si esto fuera cierto la genealogía de Doña Sancha que se establece en este árbol genealógico en línea resulta muy interesante, pero como también observé en mis notas es que la filiación a su vez de sus padres no estaba del todo clara. Gracias a una publicación de Daniel Méndez de Torres en el 2010 es que se piensa que Don Sancho era hijo de Don Pedro Fernández de Velasco porque el último fundó un mayorazgo para su hijo Sancho, a quien identificaba como su tercer hijo y poseedor del título de Señor de Arnedo. Aunque las probabilidades son grandes no se confirma con esta información que Sancho Sánchez de Velasco casado con María Enríque de Lacarra sea el mismo.

Les agradezco alguien me pueda actualizar con la nueva información en el tema.

Su amigo,
Enrique Salvador Agraz Villarreal

The Carillo ancestry of the Velasco family is a little confusing as one line with the title holder ends without children, or sons, (depending on how you interpret it) so a nephew takes a title. This nephew is married to a cousin so branches of the Carillo family are joined, but genealogists have confused the lines and provide different trees. Second marriages within the family also helped confuse the lines. A will where a great grandfather is listed helps straighten out the confusing lines. I have straightened out some of the confusion, but am still collecting and sorting primary data to solidify the lines.

There is descent from Eleanor of Aquitane but it is through the wife of the nephew that inherits the title. The wife is a cousin to her husband as they are both Carillos. This wife s ancestry and her husbands is often confused by genealogists as they confuse son in law with son.

6). Garcia Gomez de Carillo.Señor de Ormasa y Mazuelo, (d.1312) + Elvira Alvarez de Osorio

7). Sancha Garcia Carillo y Osorio + Sancho Sanchez de Velasco I señor de Medina y Pomar, adelantado mayor de Castilla

8). Fernan Sanchez de Velasco (b. 1307, d.1347) + Mayor Juana G

9). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco ( y Castañeda) III Señor de Medina y Pomar (b. 1335, d.1384) [ Pedro is married to Maria Sarmiento but she is not the mother of two of his sons, #10Pedro Hernandez de Velasco and Sancho Sanchez de Velasco.]

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

10). Pedro Hernandez de Velasco [Pedro is married to Isabel de Agüero y Ochoa de Ceballos. I do not know if his son Sancho is from this marriage] [this Pedro inherited property from his father that his father's legitimate wife, Maria Sarmiento, did not want to give up.] {this Pedro was not as stable financially as his brother Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, or his legitimate half siblings. Pedro's inheritance was tied up in court for many years and it was only because his half sibling, Juan Fernandez de Velasco y Sarmiento, was on his side in the dispute, that he was able to get his inheritance. Juan handled the lawsuit against Juan's mother, Maria Sarmiento. Pedro's full brother, Sancho Sanchez de Velasco was also involved in a lawsuit as a representative for their half brother Juan Fernandez de Velasco y Sarmiento. Sancho was in the service of Juan. Pedro eventually ended having some of his property inherited by his son, Sancho Sanchez de Velasco "el comendador", who sold it to his cousin Pedro Fernandez de Velasco y Solier, I Conde de Haro (son of Juan Fernandez de Velasco y Sarmiento and Maria de Solíer, Sra. de Villalpando)

{A document identifies Sancho Sanchez de Velasco "el comendador" (#11) as a Cousin to Pedro Velasco Solier, Conde de Haro making him a grandson of Pedro Fernandez de Velasco ( y Castañeda) III Señor de Medina y Pomar (#9), I had originally believed that Sancho Sanchez de Velasco el comendador was the son of #10Pedro Hernandez de Velasco's brother, Sancho Sanchez de Velasco.}

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
11). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, "el Comendador" + ?

12). Sancha Sanchez de Velasco + Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño (d.1523)

13). Diego Velasco de Temiño, alcaide de Temiño (d.1530) + Maria Francisca Alcocer de Bañuelos

14). Mariana "Ana" Velasco de Temiño (d.1580) + Pedro Pacheco de Rodriguez (d.1545)

15). Angela de Velasco (b.1542) Diego Flores de la Torre, Capitan, (d.1609)

16). Diego Flores de la Torre y Velasco (d. 1638) + Beatriz de Anda Altamirano y Gonzalez Castañeda

17). Diego Flores de la Torre y de Anda Altamirano (d.1653) + Isabel de Arias y Orosco

18). Diego Flores de la Torre y Arias de Orosco (d.1684) + Teresa González de Hermosillo

19). Juana Flores de la Torre y González de Hermosillo (b.abt 1655), (d.9/Nov/1714) + Tòmas Martin del Campo y Lopez de la Cruz (b.abt 1652), (d.before 19/Oct/1710)

My wife and I repeatedly descend from Tòmas Martin del Campo y Lopez de la Cruz (b.abt 1652), (d.before 19/Oct/1710) and Juana Flores de la Torre y Gonzalez de H.

Source: mygenes2000, R.A.Ricci

Sancho Sanchez el comendador is the son of Pedro de Velasco, half brother of Juan de Velasco y Sarmiento. I do not have the name of Sancho Sanchez de Velasco's mother. The Sancho Sanchez that I had believed was his father is his uncle. In order for the comendador to be a cousin, he had to descend from one of the two brothers. Further research revealed that he does not descend from Sancho Sanchez de Velasco which leaves him to be the son of Pedro. I do have a wife for this Pedro but I don't know if Sancho.Sanchez el comendador is legitimate or illegitimate. If Sancho is legitimate then he is a younger born son. I do have more information of the eldest born son.

I am sorry for having stated that his uncle was his father,

There are many men named Sancho Sanchez which has made the search for "Sancho Sanchez el comendador" a lengthy one. Secondary sources served to add confusion to the search. Looking only at the information from primary sources provides a different picture than the picture that we get from combining primary and secondary sources, so we need to ignore secondary sources.

Both "Sancho Sanchez el comendador" and "Sancho Sanchez Señor de Arnedo" have fathers named Pedro Fernandez de Velasco. It is easy to see how these men have been confused since both Sancho's have the same name, and both Sancho's have fathers with the same name. They are also very closely related. Sancho Sanchez el comendador's grandfather is the great grandfather of Sancho Sanchez Señor de Arnedo.

Some genealogist misread a document and state that Pedro is legitimate but the evidence clearly shows that he was an illegitimate son and that his inheritance was half of a property that he shared with the legitimate wife of his father. This inheritance caused many problems as she did not want to share ownership of this property with his husband's illegitimate sons. A long battle over ownership of said property provides evidence that he is not her son.

///////////////////////////////,

Sancho de Velasco comendador de Castroverde, Cousin to Pedro Velasco Solier, Conde de Haro.

Juan de Velasco and Maria Solier are the parents of Pedro Fernandez de Velasco (y Solier) 1 Conde de Haro

//////////////////////////////

1). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco + Sancha Carillo

2). Fernan Sanchez de Velasco + Mayor de Castañeda

3). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco + Maria Sarmiento

4). Juan De Velasco (y Sarmiento) Maria Solier

5). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco, ( y Solier) + 1 Conde de Haro + Beatriz Manrique de Lara y Castilla

6). Sancho Fernandez de Velasco, Señor de Arnedo + Maria Enriquez de Lacarra

///////////////////////////////,

1). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco + Sancha Carillo

2). Fernan Sanchez de Velasco + Mayor de Castañeda

3). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco ( Pedro is married to Maria Sarmiento but she is not #4 Sancho's mother)

4). Pedro Velasco ("hijo natural", full brother to a Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, half bother to Juan De Velasco y Sarmiento

5). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, comendador (The comendador is named a cousin to Pedro Fernandez de Velasco, son of Juan de Velasco y Sarmiento) they are actually half first cousins.

6). Sancha Sanchez de Velasco + Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño

Rick A. Ricci

Comunmente no se le llamaba Comendador a Don Sancho de Velasco (Sr de Arnedo) pero en funciones si lo era, ya que recibio en "encomienda" una villa llamada Villaporquera, años despues cuando murio Don Sancho los vecinos pidieron ya no ser encomienda. Esta informacion se encuentra en PARES, archivo Real Cancillería de los Reyes de Castilla. Registro del Sello de Corte.
Otro documento de cuyo contenido completo no conosco pero me parece interesante y que se encuentra en PARES es el siguinte: "Carta de finiquito que dieron Alonso Ruiz y su mujer, a favor de Sancho de Velasco, dada en Tremiño a 31 del mes de mayo de 1460."
¿Quien será este Alonso Ruiz?

I posted the the information Sancho Velasco el comendador based on a combination of primary and secondary sources. The problem is that secondary sources available to me have different information. Because of this I am not 100% sure If the line is correct. If the primary source on the comendador is correct, then Sancho Sanchez de Velasco el comendador is the son of either Sancho Sanchez de Velasco or his brother Pedro de Velasco. Both of these brothers are illegitimate brothers of Juan Fernandez de Velasco (y Sarmiento). Putting the information together from some secondary sources pointed to a descent from Sancho Sanchez de Velasco. But if Luis de Salazar y Castro's line of descent is correct then the comendador does not descend from Sancho.

Luis de Salazar y Castro mentions Sancho Sanchez de Velasco but erroneously names his mother as Maria Sarmiento, which would make him a full brother. Numerous primary documents clearly show that Sancho and Pedro are not sons of Maria Sarmiento and that they are born out of wedlock. Luis de Salazar y Castro Cites a document that names them as brothers. The document is correct that they are brothers but other primary sources are more specific and show they "brothers from a different mother."

Luis de Salazar y Castro Also gives a line of descent for Sancho Sanchez de Velasco that does not seem right. I need to study it more before I explain all the difficulties with his line of descent. I repeat, if Luis de Salazar y Castro's line of descent is correct, which I find doubtful, then Sancho De Velasco el comendador does not descend from the Sancho De Velasco, half brother of Juan de Velasco y Sarmiento. If this were so, then the only line of descent possible would be from Pedro de Velasco, the other half brother of Juan de Velasco y Sarmiento.

I am hoping that putting this information on this website will spur someone to research this family and help confirm or disprove the lines of descent that I have posted. Using my notes and sources would lead to my same conclusions. I am hoping that someone will research this from a different angle and hopefully come up with new sources.
R.A. Ricci

///////////////////////////////,

Sancho de Velasco comendador de Castroverde, Cousin to Pedro Velasco Solier, Conde de Haro.

Juan de Velasco and Maria Solier are the parents of Pedro Fernandez de Velasco (y Solier) 1 Conde de Haro

//////////////////////////////

1). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco + Sancha Carillo

2). Fernan Sanchez de Velasco + Mayor de Castañeda

3). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco + Maria Sarmiento

4). Juan De Velasco (y Sarmiento) Maria Solier

5). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco, ( y Solier) + 1 Conde de Haro + Beatriz Manrique de Lara y Castilla

6). Sancho Fernandez de Velasco, Señor de Arnedo + Maria Enriquez de Lacarra

///////////////////////////////,

1). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco + Sancha Carillo

2). Fernan Sanchez de Velasco + Mayor de Castañeda

3). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco ( Pedro is married to Maria Sarmiento but she is not #4 Sancho's mother)

4). Sancho Velasco (hijo natural, named in a big legal dispute)

5). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, comendador (The comendador is named a cousin to Pedro Fernandez de Velasco)

6). Sancha Sanchez de Velasco + Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño

////////////////////////////////////////

However, an historian a long time ago wrote that he felt that even though the document says they are cousins, there was an added generation on Sancho Sanchez "el comendador"'s part between #'s 4 and 5. That added generation would be Diego Sanchez de Velasco. He did not write out the whole tree but stated that el comendador is really a nephew. If he was correct then the tree would look like this:

1). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco + Sancha Carillo

2). Fernan Sanchez de Velasco + Mayor de Castañeda

3). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco ( Pedro is married to Maria Sarmiento but she is not #4 Sancho's mother)

4). Sancho Velasco (hijo natural, named in a big legal dispute)

5). Diego Sanchez de Velasco

6). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, comendador

7.) Sancha Sanchez de Velasco + Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño

What we do know is that the comendador was the either the son or the grandson of #4Sancho De Velasco, the natural son of Pedro Fernandez de Velasco (and not his wife Maria Sarmiento). #4Sancho is mentioned in his father's will and in his half brother, Juan Velascos will. He also is in the service of his half brother Juan de Velasco. #4Sancho is also named in a big court case in which he is representing Juan de Velasco's interest.

It depends on whether you believe the primary source document that names him as a cousin, or the historian that believes that there should be an added generation which makes his father the half first cousin and him a nephew of Pedro Fernandez de Velasco. He believed that the confusion came about because of the illegitimate status of #4Sancho Sanchez de Velasco.
Source: Mygenes2000 by R.A.Ricci

Dear Danny,

I have not confirmed the identity of the parents of Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño. I have been researching the family and I have many sources to check before presenting my research on his ancestors. I will say that although I have not found evidence that Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño used the title "Señor de Bureba", I believe that he most likely descends from the señores de Bureba and that is why he may have been referred to as such by some genealogists. So Leon is right that we haven't found him with a title of nobility.

There is a big mistake in Wikipedia. They have Sancho de Velasco as the son of Maria Sarmiento. He was not her son. He was illegitimate and did work for his half brother, Juan de Velasco (y Sarmiento). All primary sources are clear that Sancho is not the son of Maria Sarmiento.

The genealogist Luis de Salazar y Castro erroneously claimed that Sancho Sanchez de Velasco was a son of Maria Sarmiento. Many people see the family tree that he put together and assume that it is correct. That is not the only mistake that he makes on this line. There was another half brother of Juan de Velasco named Pedro de Velasco. Luis de Salazar y Castro does not name him. The descent of Sancho is also off as it jumps a few decades. It is obviously missing at least one generation.

R.A. Ricci

The people who were holding out hope that Sancho Sánchez de Velasco and María Enríquez de Lacarra are the paternal grandparents of Sancha Sanchez de Velasco married to Alfonso Ruiz de Temino will be disappointed to find out that her father, Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, el comendador, has been proven to be from another branch of the family.

But genealogy is a science. When we get additional information, we need to use that information to help us in our research. Sometimes genealogists, myself included, find information that changes the direction of our research. Instead of being disappointed, we need to embrace the new information since our search is for the truth. The search is always for the truth, otherwise hours of research are a waste of time. A fake family tree can be made with much less effort and time. And a fake family tree isn't worth the paper it is written on. The effort and hours of research are only worth it if we are seeking the truth. Any additional information provided for our research is always welcome.

R.A.Ricci

.
A primary source states that the comendador is a first cousin to Pedro Fernandez de Velasco so the comendador and Pedro Fernandez de Velasco y Solier. This means that they have the same grandfather.

It depends on whether you believe the primary source document that names him as a cousin, or the historian that believes that there should be an added generation which makes his father the half first cousin and him a nephew of Pedro Fernandez de Velasco. The confusion may be because of the illegitimate status of Sancho Sanchez de Velasco and Pedro Velasco.

What we do know is that the comendador was the either the son or the grandson of Sancho Sanchez De Velasco or Pedro de Velasco the natural sons of Pedro Fernandez de Velasco (and not his wife Maria Sarmiento). Sancho and Pedro are mentioned in his father's will and in their half brother, Juan Velasco's will. They also are in the service of their half brother Juan de Velasco. Sancho is also named in a big court case in which he is representing Juan de Velasco's interest.

Both Genealogists Luis de Salazar y Castro and Luis Vilar y Pascual did not have Sancho Sanchez de Velasco el comendador as a descendant of Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, the half brother of Juan De Velasco y Solier. Both Luis de Salazar y Castro and Luis Vilar y Pascual have mistakes in the family trees that they have constructed for Sancho Sanchez de Velasco. Luis de Salazar y Castro mistakes that he is a full brother and Luis Vilar y Pascual has a mistake for his wife. I can explain the most likely reasons for why they made these mistakes. I can not explain why they don't include Sancho Sanchez el comendador in their lines of descent.

If their lines of descent are correct then Sancho Sanchez de Velasco el comendador must descend from Pedro de Velasco, the other half brother. Not much of this half brother is known to me at this moment except that he was also in the service of his half brother Juan de Velasco y Sarmiento and that he did not receive his full inheritance because Juan de Velascos mother also lay claim to it and she did not want to give it to the illegitimate son of her husband. It was supposed to have been split, half for her and half for Pedro.

/////////////////////////
///////////////////////////////,

1). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco + Sancha Carillo

2). Fernan Sanchez de Velasco + Mayor de Castañeda

3). Pedro Fernandez de Velasco ( Pedro is married to Maria Sarmiento but she is not #4 Sancho's mother)

4). Question is which brother, Sancho de Velasco or Pedro de Velasco, (both hijos naturales, They are named in a big legal disputes between their half brother Juan de Velasco y Sarmiento and his mother.)

5). Sancho Sanchez de Velasco, comendador (The comendador is named a cousin to Pedro Fernandez de Velasco)

6). Sancha Sanchez de Velasco + Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño

Sancho de Velasco comendador de Castroverde, Cousin to Pedro Velasco Solier, Conde de Haro.

Juan de Velasco and Maria Solier are the parents of Pedro Velasco Solier

Piece by piece the puzzle comes together. Slowly at times, but every little piece that we add brings us closer to completing the puzzle.

R.A. Ricci

Dear Leon de Tejada and Enrique Salvador Agraz Villarrea,

Thank you for clarifying that Sancho Velasco el comendador and Sancho Velasco el Señor de Arnedo are not the same person. Because of your statements, I dropped what I was working on and focused my energy on trying to find out more information on Sancho Velasco el comendador.

Though I have not yet found answers to our questions on Sancho Velasco el comendador, I discovered Isabel Mendoza (Velasco) the half sister to the Virrey (2nd Viceroy). For me personally, this was a bigger find then actually finding Sancho Velasco since I had been looking for an " Isabel Mendoza" that matched all the clues for about four decades.

We do have leads since he is called a cousin, we just need to find out what degree cousin. Once we find out where he was comendador, then we can focus our energy on documents in that area to see if we can find out more about him. I need to go back to working on what I had been working on before, but will go back to looking for Sancho Velasco el comendador when I finish my current projects.

Thanks again,
R.A. Ricci

The last time that I commented on my Sancha Velasco de Lacarra findings I was accused of riding the tailcoats on the discussion so I won't repeat all of the documentation. Yes, our Sancha Velasco de Lacarra is the one that is an ancestor to the temino de Velasco. And it is through this line that there is a clear why : " Uno de los hijos de Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño y de Sancha de Velasco tomó el nombre de Pedro Gómez de Velasco".

The problem is the evidence is in the inquisition records of the judeo converso part of the family. Anyone refusing to believe that we have judeo converso ancestors will avoid looking at these records which actually lead back to royalty like the Fernandez de Hijar or Velasco lines. Besides descent from Enrique Ii of Castile,there is repeated descent from Portuguese kings, Aragon kings, and Sancho Iv of Castile. There is also a line of descent from English royalty. I will document these lines in my book.

R.A.. Ricci

Para mí hasta que no haya evidencia en vez de promesas y documentos perdidos y ocultos seguimos en la misma.

Nadie me ha podido contestar hasta la fecha lo siguiente: El padre de Sancha de Velasco fue el Comendador Sancho Sánchez de Velasco (nunca se menciona a la madre). ¿Comendador de dónde? ¿A qué orden de Caballería pertenecía?

Veamos. Si Sancha es la supuesta hija de Sancho Fernández de Velasco, Señor de Arnedo y de María Enríquez de Lacarra...

¿Por qué en el único documento que muestra la filiación de Sancha como hija del Comendador Sancho de Velasco (Comisión sobre la herencia del comendador Sancho de Velasco. 1491-9-30 Burgos) NO aparecen Antonio de Velasco y Enríquez de Lacarra, Conde Consorte de Nieva, Francisca y Ana de Velasco y Lacarra entre la gente que pelea por la herencia? En teoría son hermanos de Sancha ¿Dónde están?

Me parece raro que en el pleito de la herencia del Comendador Sancho no aparezca NI UN Velasco y Enríquez de Lacarra ni se mencione a Arnedo.

Los que aparecen en estos dos documentos relativos a la herencia del Comendador Sancho Sánchez de Velasco son los hijos de Sancha de Velasco y de Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño, mencionan a María de Setién esposa de Rodrigo de Velasco, a un Antonio de Velasco, vecino de Villegas (Burgos) y es todo.

Hago notar que Antonio de Velasco y Lacarra, Conde Consorte de Nieva, Señor de Arnedo NO aparece como vecino de Villegas (Burgos), los documentos de la época lo sitúan en su señorío, Arnedo, La Rioja y explícitamente mencionan que es "Señor de Arnedo". El que aparece en el pleito no, algo que es altamente inusual.

Vuelvo a lo mismo ¿Por qué en el pleito por la herencia del comendador Sancho no están los Velasco y Enríquez de Lacarra?

Enrique, por esto y más tengo dudas en este tema. ¿Por qué hacen al Comendador Sancho Sánchez de Velasco y al Señor de Arnedo Sancho Fernández de Velasco la misma persona? No he visto en documentos que mencionen al Comendador como Señor de Arnedo y este último tampoco es mencionado como Comendador.

Si tienes alguna idea o información firme que afirme o contradiga lo escrito te lo agradeceré mucho.

Estimado Erik,

Te agradezco la excelente aclaración acerca de lo que hasta ahora sabemos de la filiación de Sancha de Velasco.

Me parece muy viable tu teoría en la que Pedro Gómez de Velasco estaría relacionado con Sancha de Velasco, primero por el hecho de que mencionas que uno de los hijos de Sancha utilizó el mismo nombre y segundo porque los documentos relativos a la herencia del comendador Sancho Sánchez de Velasco, padre de Sancha, citan a un Antonio de Velasco vecino de Villegas (Burgos), región en la que Pedro Gómez de Velasco se había asentado antes.

Como ya has argumentado hasta ahora no hay razones para fusionar al Comendador con el Señor de Arnedo en una misma persona. Estos títulos que se utilizaron distintamente son los que nos están ayudando a dirigir el curso de las investigaciones, además de tomar en cuenta a las personas que participaron en el pleito de herencia del Comendador.

No he estudiado profundamente a esta familia por lo que me reservo a aportar nuevas hipótesis pero ten por seguro que si llegase a encontrar información valiosa en el tema lo haré saber debidamente.

Enrique Agraz

Estimado Enrique,

Gracias a ti, volver a sacar estos temas es importante porque siempre hay la posibilidad de encontrar información nueva y nos permite comparar datos.

Con lo siguiente podemos cerrar el asunto del Comendador y del Señor de Arnedo:

1) Sancho Fernández de Velasco, Señor de Arnedo. Esposo de María Enríquez de Lacarra. Otorgó su último testamento el 23 de Febrero de 1493 en Valladolid.

2) La comisión sobre la herencia del comendador Sancho de Velasco (padre de Sancha) es del 30 de Septiembre de 1491 en Villadiego, Burgos.

El comendador Sancho Sánchez de Velasco murió antes de 1491, fecha en la que todavía estaba vivo el Señor de Arnedo (muerto no antes de 1493). NO son la misma persona y podemos entonces desechar la teoría de Sancha Velasco de Lacarra.

Creo que lo más sano y centrado sería buscar entre los hermanos del I Conde de Haro.

Aquí hay algo curioso: En el manuscrito del Linaje de Bañuelos que hace Salazar y Castro (que como sabemos miembros de esta familia enlazan con nuestros Temiño) está escrito que Antón Ruiz de Bañuelos, natural de Salas de Bureba, en el testamento que otorgó en 1434 menciona que su hija María de Velasco está en casa de don Pedro de Velasco, Conde de Haro, su tío. Hay que tomar esto con cuidado pero creo que podría ser una pista a seguir respecto a los grados familiares que había respecto a los Temiño, los Bañuelos y los Velasco.

Un abrazo,

P.s. Revisé los testamentos que están en línea (PARES) de Sancho de Velasco, Señor de Arnedo (1482, 1490, 1493) y no encontré mención de Sancha ni de los Temiño ni de María de Setién. Aunque no tenga relevancia para el tema en cuestión mencionan a Pedro de Puelles quien vendió Davalillos y San Asensio a su esposa María Enríquez de Lacarra. (Pedro era hermano de Diego de Puelles y Ponce de León, bisabuelo de Juan de Puelles y Sanz, el que pasó a Zacatecas y dejó descendencia en Nueva Galicia).

me dirijo al Señor R.A.. Ricci para pedirle de favor me informe cuando haya terminado su libro , para comprar un ejemplar ya sea que me diga en donde comprarlo o me indique la vía a seguir .

There is conflicting information on Sanchas father. There seems to be multiple relationships between the Ruiz, banuelos and velasco families and that seems to be the source of the confusion.

There is a Sancha Sanchez de Velasco that is a granddaughter, the source that names her uncle should have read "tio abuelo" instead of tio. Under this scenario she still descends from the Sanchez enriquez Lacarra but with an added generation.but there are other possibilities,

One of the problems that people may have in looking for the correct family tree is that they don't have much experience in the naming practices of the Iberian peninsula in the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries. The naming practices were not consistent from one area to another. Naming practices in Castile, Basque, and Portuguese regions differed. Naming practices weren't always consistent even in the same region. If you look only at genealogical tables that are found in books you often find generations over centuries using the same surname. This practice by genealogists giving people surnames that they never used has made it at times more difficult when looking for primary sources.
One important naming practice would be a persons first name, followed by a second name, a surname that could be a surname passed down or it could be the fathers first name transformed into a surname, the third name would be the persons home town or or a word identifying a landmark as to where they are from, or the surname could be title of an ancestor. Sometimes the whole name was just a complete copy of an ancestors name, the ancestor could have been someone from a few generations back. But in order to unravel family trees, it is important to learn all of the different naming practices and to always look for clues.
Many times the person will use different variations of the same name An example would be "Sancho Temino de Vaelasco was actually Sancho Sanchez Velasco de Temino with "Sancho Sanchez" being the name of an ancestor or his father name also being Sancho, The surname Vealsco being the name of a title being passed down as a surname, and Temino being the surname indicating where the family was from at one time. With the moving from one town to another the surname indicating where they were from sometimes changed to indicate a new town or landmark but sometimes it remained the same despite moving from one region to another.

There was a Ruiz de velasco branch of the family, other branches of the family were "Ruiz Gomez de Velsaco". "Ruiz de Carillo de Velasco". There was also a Velasco branch that married into the Rojas family that also had Sanchos and Sanchas. The key clue for finding Sancho Sanchez de Velasco de Temino's ancestry is to remember that is called a cousin and his daughter a niece to the Fernandez Velascos that they are involved with in a dispute. He may not be a first cousin, even though it only says primo, and not primo segundo.

Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño, señor de Bureba , according to naming practices could have been a Velasco but dropped the Velasco when he became señor de Bureba. So he could have been named Alfonso Ruiz Velasco de Temino.

Another example of these naming practices not always being consistent is : " Uno de los hijos de Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño y de Sancha de Velasco tomó el nombre de Pedro Gómez de Velasco". This could be a giant clue to unraveling the different relationships between the Ruiz, banuelos, Velascos, and Fernandez de Velascos.

R.A.Ricci

Estimado Enrique,

Eso francamente me parecen tonterías y creo saber a qué sitio te refieres. Lamentablemente son sitios en los cuales cualquier persona puede colocar datos y hacer de las investigaciones un reverendo desastre. Yo puse hasta Alfonso y Sancha (sin sus padres) en ese mismo sitio pero algún individuo puso que Alfonso era "Señor de Bureba" lo cual es absolutamente erróneo. NUNCA usó ese título y esa misma persona debió de haber sido quien los conectó con los de Arnedo.

A mi no me convence lo del señorío de Arnedo, me parece muy forzado y hasta la fecha no hay evidencia. Hay una rama de los Velasco menos conocida que pasó a Burgos con un Pedro Gómez de Velasco y eso lo escribí antes. Toma esto en consideración: Uno de los hijos de Alfonso Ruiz de Temiño y de Sancha de Velasco tomó el nombre de Pedro Gómez de Velasco. Esto lo evidenció también uno de los grandes que ha dejado un vacío enorme: Guillermo Tovar de Teresa.

¿Coincidencia? ¿Qué opinas?

LdT

Genealogy Research