Online Status

Por superhorrible |

Hola,

Como muchos en este grupo soy descendiente de Maria de Isla y Cristobal Martinez Lozano quienes tuvieron descendencia en Aguascalientes en 1600's. Encontre en el foro, algo que escribio CARLOS PEREDO en 2014, hablando sobre MARIA DE ISLAS MOCTEZUMA:

" Gracias a Datos que en gran parte fueron investigados por Don Guillermo Tovar, sabemos con claridad que Benito de Isla casado con Magdalena Lavezares fueron padres de

Magdalena de Lavezares y

María de Isla"

Alguien sabe la fuente documental de la investigacion de Don Guillermo Tovar a la que CARLOS PEREDO se esta refiriendo? Estoy tratando, como muchos, de establecer el arbol de la familia ISLA en la zona.

Saludos

Susana Leniski

After taking another look at the subject of María de Islas I see there is still an issue that the parent(s) of María de Islas, wife of Cristóbal de Lozano Martínez, are not named in any document therefore we don't know how she was related to Benito de Islas.

The fact that there was a María de Islas that was the illegitimate daughter of Benito de Islas does not mean that she is the same person that was the wife of Cristóbal de Lozano Martínez. There could have been a 3rd María de Islas especially since it is possible that there were two Benito de Islas and that the first Benito had another son, or even a daughter, that then had another daughter also named María de Islas. We know that females were at times given the name of a female ancestor. Another possibility is that Benito married twice and Juana Navarro is the 2nd wife and there was another María de Islas with the first wife. We don't even have the marriage document or información matrimonial of Benito de Isla and Juana Navarro.

Without proof that the María de Islas married to Cristóbal de Lozano Martínez was the illegitimate daughter of Benito de Islas she shouldn't be attributed as being the same person.

I have not been able to access the sigue website for a couple months now. Could someone please upload Maria de Islas Montezuma's will to this site?

Thank you,
Alex

Susana,

Benito de Isla is the son of Bernardo de Isla and Magdalena Labezares. Benito de Isla's wife is probably Juana Navarro, probable daughter of Petronila de Moctezuma and Martin Navarro de Gabay. There is a Magdalena de Labezares, married to Francisco Gonzalez that is a legitimate daughter of Benito de Isla and a Maria de Isla, that's also a legitimate daughter of Benito de Isla, that's married to Captain Andres Martin de Sotomayor, not the Maria de Isla married to Cristobal Martin Lozano. This is proven by the testimony of Mateo Gonzalez de Rubalcava in this dispensa:

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:9392-X4SG-P

...que son bisnietos de dos hermanas que lo fueron doña María de Islas y doña Magdalena de Labezares quien tuvo por hijo a Bernardino de Islas y Bernardino de Islas a Nicolás de Dios Islas y Nicolás de Dios Islas tuvo por hija a María Catarina de Islas. Y de doña María de Islas tuvo por hija a Jacinta Martínez y Jacinta Martínez tuvo por hijo a Jacinto Díaz y Jacinto Díaz tuvo por hijo a José Díaz de León, pretenso.

The Maria de Isla that's married to Cristobal Martin Lozano is most likely the one described in a separate dispensa as mestiza hija bastarda de Benito de Islas, who's been mentioned in several posts in this forum, therefore making her also a sister to the other Maria de Isla y Moctezuma and Magdalena de Labezares. You can find more information on both Maria de Isla's and their sister Magdalena de Labezares here:

http://www.nuestrosranchos.org/node/22972

You can find your Maria de Isla's tree here:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/De_Islas-25

Danny C. Alonso

Danny,

Thank you for answering. I have a different theory regarding Maria de Isla (married to Christobal Lozano). She is the niece of Maria de Isla (married to Andres Martin de Sotomayor).
According with the book "Genealogia de Nochistlan antiguo reino de la Nueva Galicia en el siglo XVII segun archivos parroquiales" (Jose Luis Vazquez y Rodriguez de Frias). Maria de Isla (married to Christobal Lozano) is the daughter of Francisco Gonzalez Martinez y Magdalena de la Besares (daughter of Benito Isla y "Juana Navarro?"). This couple had also another daughter Petronila de Ysla (according with the author unmarried).

Now, I found the baptismal record of LEONOR LOZANO ISLA (film # 299421 22 may 1617 El Sagrario/Aguascalientes).

"En la labor de Xiconaque en 22 de el mes de mayo de 1617 anos bauptize y pusse oleos a Leonor hija de Christoval Lozano y Maria de Isla, fueron sus padrinos FRANCISCO GONZALES, hermano de dicho Christoval Lozano y PETRONA DE ISLA, hermana de la dicha MARIA DE ISLA"

As you can see, the document of Leonor Lozano confirms at least part of the thesis of the book, Maria de Isla (married to Christoval) had a sister Petrona (Petronila) very likely unmarried. She is clearly not the bastard daughter of Benito, she is (very likely) the granddaughter of Benito.

Another important consideration are the years. Bernardino de Ysla (father of Benito de Ysla) died before 1566, in el Archivo General de Indias there is a document regarding the dispute (Disputa de Bienes) of Bernardino de Ysla, the document has a date of 1573 and 1588. In that document Benito is not mentioned because surely Benito was already dead. The widow Magdalena de la Besares is mentioned, as well the brother and sister of Benito. On the other hand Maria de Isla (married to Christoval Lozano) was having children in 1617, very likely Maria de Isla (married to Christoval) was born around 1595-1600.

Another point, Benito's arrival to New Spain was on 1557 (according with the document that we all have). If Benito was 20-25 years old (maybe more) he had to be born around 1530-1537. That would make him 70 years old when Maria de Isla (married to Christoval) was born. But based on my previous point Benito very likely was already dead when Maria de Isla (married to Christoval) was born. Just a Thought

Thank you again Danny

Saludos desde Seattle

Susana L

Susana,

I've seen this baptism several times, and I'm not sure what it changes. If you look at the link to the tree I provided and based on the available dispensas and other records where they are named, Maria de Isla is already listed as the sibling to the other Maria de Isla, as well as, the sister to Magdalena Lavazares and Petrona de Isla. Also, I already have Cristobal Lozano listed as the (uncertain) brother of Francisco Gonzalez. The thing that might change things is the death of a Benito de Isla, if true, before 1573. Since we know that the Maria de Isla married to Andres Martin de Sotomayor was for certain born very close to 1600 based on the fact that she was having children close to, if not actually, in the 1640s and since we know for an absolute certainty that this Maria de Isla is the proven daughter of Benito the Isla, we know for a fact that this particular Benito de Isla, father of Magdalena de Lavezares and Maria de Isla y Moctezuma, was in fact alive close to 1600. So, either you're wrong about Benito de Isla's death or it's a different Benito de Isla. The thread I provided the link to had mentioned various theories that there were possibly two Benito de Islas. If it can be proven that Benito de Isla, son of Bernardino de Isla and Magdalena Lavezares was dead by 1573 than there's definitely a missing generation. Another thing, if Juana Navarro did have children with Benito de Isla, based on the generally accepted timeframe regarding the birth of Petronila de Moctezuma, if Juana Navarro is her daughter, she wouldn't be anywhere close to childbearing years until mid 1580s, which again would disprove the death of Benito de Isla anywhere close to 1573, unless it's a different Benito de Isla.

Danny C. Alonso

Danny,

I believe in the current theory, the Benito de Isla (I) which came from Spain is not the same as the one that (maybe) married Juana Navarro, but the father of another Benito de Isla (II). Reason being there still is a generation required to get Magdalena Labesares (I) in the bloodline, who would be the wife of Benito de Isla (I) and grandmother to Magdalena Labesares (II) who married Francisco Gonzalez.

That was from memory, I may be wrong!

Alex

Hola Susana,

The link that Danny provided appears overwhelming, but it has a lot of good info. Here it is again, for your convenience: http://www.nuestrosranchos.org/node/22972

Read my post from 28 May 2015; in the last paragraph, I include another clue supporting that Cristobal Lozano and Francisco Martinez Gonzalez were brothers.

Otherwise, from documents we’ve seen, we know only that Benito de la Isla had 3 daughters: Maria de Islas y Moctezuma, Magdalena de Lavezaris, and their mestiza half-sister, Maria de Islas.

I’ve seen nothing linking Benito de la Isla cc Juana Navarro to this family, other than the the corresponding name & surname. Nor have we seen anything linking Maria de Isla cc Cristobal Lozano to this family (along with her supposed sister, Petrona). The surname “Isla/s” was used by various individuals and families throughout Colonial Mexico, and it’s hard to determine whether there are any links. Everything is still speculation, at this point.

Alex, go to PARES, then cut & past this into the search field: Juro a favor de Magdalena de Besares, Bartolomé de Isla, Sebastián Besares y Bernardina de Isla de 3.447 maravedís.

It’s only the index, and there is no date, only that it’s from the 2nd half of the XVI century.

In the same above-mentioned thread, I cite other PARES documents suggesting that Benito’s mother, Magdalena de Lavezaris (along with Sebastian Besares mentioned above) lived in Mexico during the 1530’s, with her supposed brother, Guido the bookseller. The Lavezaris originated in Genoa, Italy; I believe that Rick Ricci has suggested that the “Isla/s” surname also originated in Italy, which would make sense: apparently, several genovese booktraders moved to Sevilla during the late XV Century.

That's my 2c.

Gracias y Saludos!
Manny Diez Hermosillo

Ok I was able to find the document, thanks a million Manny!

Now as the description is quite short, does it state that a judgement to Magdalena de Besares, Bartolomé de Isla, Sebastián Besares y Bernardina de Isla has been for a sum of money? I dont believe it necessarily means Magdalena de Besares is a widow?

What a totally interesting document with that combo of surnames in Spain!

Manny I saw your timeline but to clarify, are you thinking Magdalena Lebasares' (m. Francisco Gonzalez) father Benito was the same Benito to travel to the Americas with Guido Lebasares?

Alex

Alex

I'm not opposed to the idea of two Benito de Isla's. I've just never seen an actual document that definitely says that there are two and I think the dates still work fine with just one Benito de Isla. If you figure that Benito de Isla was fairly young when he came over in 1557, which would make sense since he's listed as the servant of his uncle Guido de Lavezares, then he was probably born sometime around 1540. There's no issue with him being alive and having kids in the 1580s or even 1600s, that is of course if he didn't die before 1573. But, there's no way that Maria de Isla y Moctezuma or Magdalena de Lavezares were born prior to 1573, so their Benito de Isla was definitely alive well after 1573. Also since Juana Navarro has come up I also think that she's the wife of Benito de Isla and most like the mother of Maria de Isla y Moctezuma and probably Magdalena de Lavezares. Jaime Holcombe names her as the wife of Benito de Isla and her specific date of death and even her albaceas and where they were vecinos of. That's too specific for him to not have seen the actual record.

Danny C. Alonso

I agree with Danny. Benito de Isla was young when he crossed the Atlantic. The only detail that I disagree with Danny is Benito's age. I believe that he was younger than seventeen. When looking at all the information together, it seems as he was just about to, or had just become, a teenager.

Danny's comment about Jaime Holcombe providing much detail about Benito de Isla reminds me of the issue of Petronila Moctezuma. Many people still claim that it has not been proven that she was a descendant of Moctezuma because they don't have a primary source document to prove it. But they are wrong, it has been proven. Just because I can't produce the document because it has become lost does not mean that it didn't exist. I saw and held the evidence of her descent from Moctezuma with my own eyes and hands. I have provided details previously of what the document in previous posts. I have even provided that the primary source document has a slight error in our eyes. The author of the primary document stated that she was a granddaughter of Moctezuma. The precise wording should have been great granddaughter. The document is even dated in the narrative as it states that Lope Ruiz de Esparza had arrived two years earlier and that he had married Petronila Moctezuma some time between his arrival and the writing of the document. Since I have seen first hand the documentation, and the library insists that nothing was thrown away, just moved around, the document will one day be found in the library of the Mormon temple on Santa Monica Blvd in west Los Angeles.

Thank you Danny for presenting the case for one Benito de Isla. Like you, I am not completely against the idea of there being two Benito de Isla, but feel that Jaime Holcombe most likely had a primary source(s) from where he got his information. The only issue is that he is not around to question regarding his source(s). Since I am still around, I can adamantly state that there is primary source evidence of Petronila's descent from Moctezuma II. By the way, Moctezuma was never known during his life time as the "II". He was called Moctezuma the Younger. The Aztecs did not use a numbering system like first second or third in people's names.

Thanks again Danny,
Rick A. Ricci

It’s been so long since I’ve looked at these lines - I backburner’d them, for lack of documentation, just waiting til someone comes up with the missing piece to the puzzle.

But I agree with Rick; I think Benito could’ve been as young as 12 when he passed to Indies, placing his birth as late as 1545. So he can still be father of the 2 Maria’s & Magdalena. Whether he’s the same who was married to the Navarro girl, it’s still beyond me, without more documentation on that couple.

But, reading these recent entries has stirred-up some new ideas, and here’s some food for thought:

“Omissions” come to mind, for me, a lot these days. What I mean is, the surname “Isla/s” is associated with Magdalena de Lavezaris cc Francisco Martinez Gonzalez: she used it, and her descendants used it. Then, why didn’t her supposed sister, Maria de Islas y Moctezuma, use “Lavezaris"? And for that matter, why didn’t Maria de Islas name any of her children “Benito,” “Bernardino” or “Magdalena,” if those were the names of her father and grandparents? She had 12 kids, after all. And, likewise, why didn’t Magdalena de Lavezaris or her descendants use the imperial surname?

It could be just a breaking with tradition, but these are viable questions, and they got me thinking: the only thing linking Magdalena de Lavezaris and Maria de Islas as sisters, is that one dispensation, written years after their deaths. What if they weren’t sisters? What if they were aunt & niece? What if Maria de Islas is daughter of a sibling of Magdalena de Lavezaris (i.e., Benito de la Isla “II”), who married into the Moctezuma line (Juana Navarro)? The timeline works: Andres Martin cc Maria de Islas baptized Nicolas in 1626, so she could’ve been born as late as 1610. This would give us the source of “Moctezuma” in her name, and explain why it’s never associated with Magdalena de Lavezaris, while linking Juana Navarro to Martin Gabay and Doña Petronila. All packaged so neatly, reconciling timelines and surnames, and with an Aztec bow on top!

But this is speculation, and we just have to wait until someone uncovers that missing piece. It’s out there, and someone will find it!

Thank you for the wonderful Sunday afternoon discussion!
Manny Diez Hermosillo

Manny,

I think a lot of the names have to be specific for them to use a certain apellido. Like only people named Magdalena use Labezares and the only child of Andres Martin de Sotomayor and Maria de Isla y Moctezuma to use the Moctezuma name is the other Maria de Isla y Moctezuma. It makes me wonder whether there's a specific Moctezuma named Maria that they're all named after. Like all the Ana Dominguez's named after Ana Dominguez.

Also, I don't think Maria not naming her kids Magdalena or Benito really is that significant. I've seen lots of instances in my tree where families name their children after a specific ancestor and they continue the practice without using the names of the other sibling. I think that the parents decide to honor a specific ancestor or specific line and the children continue to honor that.

Also about Magdalena de Labezares not using the imperial name. It's possible that only Maria de Isla y Moctezuma married to Andres Martin de Sotomayor is the only one that descends from Moctezuma. If she is the daughter of Juana Navarro and Juana Navarro is the daughter of Petronila de Moctezuma and assuming Petronila was born about 1555, then Juana Navarro was born in the 1570s at the very earliest, meaning the very earliest Maria de Isla y Moctezuma could be born is the mid to late 1580s and I actually think she was born much later. Either way she's definitely the youngest of the three known siblings. I actually think the mestiza Maria de Isla and Magdalena de Labezares are close to a decade older than Maria de Isla y Moctezuma.

So, it's possible that all of the siblings are half siblings with different mothers.

Danny C. Alonso

Hi Alex,

A known daughter of Maria de Isla y Moctezuma and Cap. Andres Martin de Sotomayor, married Agustin Lopez de la Cerda. Proof that she uses the name is in this dispensa:

Hacienda de Ciénega de Mata. Ojuelos de Jalisco. Jal Octubre 27 de 1748 Exp 95- Dispensa de tercero grado y cuarto grado, ambos de afinidad por cópula licita - Santiago López de la Cerda, español de 31 años de edad, originario de esta hacienda en la Estancia de las Papas, hijo legítimo de Don Juan López de la Cerda y de Doña Anna Maria Muñoz de la Barba, ya difuntos; con María Antonia Negrete, española de 35 años de edad, originaria de la Villa de San Felipe. Obispado de Michoacán. y residente en esta hacienda, en la Estancia de los Gachupines de esta feligresía de la Ciénega de Mata, viuda de Joseph Moreno Sotomayor. Declaración del pretenso: Por ser primo segundo del difunto Joseph Moreno Sotomayor, porque su padre Juan López de la Cerda, era primo hermano de Sebastiana Martín, madre del dicho Joseph Moreno. Declaración de Don Manuel Espinosa, español de 70 años de edad: Que Doña María de Islas Montezuma, abuela del pretenso, era hermana de Isidro Martín padre de Sebastiana Martín, madre de Joseph Moreno, difunto. Se otorgó la dispensa en la Ciudad de Guadalajara.

Also, the same daughter of Capitan Andres Martin de Sotomayor and Maria de Isla on her testamento, which is much closer to the relevant timeframe, names her as Maria de Islas y Sotomayor and describes her as "hija del Capitan Andres Martin y Sotomayor y de Maria de Isla y Moctezuma." So, two separate documents show both mother and daughter using the name Maria de Isla y Moctezuma.

Chris

Dear Manny,

I read over and over your speculation on the Islas - Moctezuma link. It does make sense as it takes all the people and timelines into consideration. As you wrote, the only issue is that dispensation, but it wouldn't be the first time that a marriage dispensation written many years later contains an error. Hopefully one day we find a puzzle piece that clarifies the family tree.

Manny's statement/speculation:

"It could be just a breaking with tradition, but these are viable questions, and they got me thinking: the only thing linking Magdalena de Lavezaris and Maria de Islas as sisters, is that one dispensation, written years after their deaths. What if they weren’t sisters? What if they were aunt & niece? What if Maria de Islas is daughter of a sibling of Magdalena de Lavezaris (i.e., Benito de la Isla “II”), who married into the Moctezuma line (Juana Navarro)? The timeline works: Andres Martin cc Maria de Islas baptized Nicolas in 1626, so she could’ve been born as late as 1610. This would give us the source of “Moctezuma” in her name, and explain why it’s never associated with Magdalena de Lavezaris, while linking Juana Navarro to Martin Gabay and Doña Petronila. All packaged so neatly, reconciling timelines and surnames, and with an Aztec bow on top!" (Manny)

Thanks again,
Rick A. Ricci

Danny,

My only point is that, I'm not convince that Maria de Islas (wife of Christobal Martinez Lozano) is the mestiza daughter of Benito de Islas. I'm sure you have seen the marriage information between Pedro Rodriguez and Petrona de Islas (Nochistlan 1 Aug 1680). The marriage relationships talks about the descendants of Luisa de isla (dau of Maria de Isla mestiza). Luisa de Isla (married Antonio de Aguayo) very likely lived in Nochistlan. On the other hand Maria de Isla (married to Christobal) lived in Aguascalientes, Aguas. Maria de isla and Christoval Lozano didn't have a daughter named Luisa de Isla, that the document in Nochistlan is refering to. The only thing that I know for sure is Maria de Isla (married to Christoval) had a sister named Petronila de Isla, but at the same time I don't know for sure who are the parents of both.
I was reading one more time the letters of Jaime Holcombe (Mary Lou Montagna) on the subject. it is very interesting that Maria de islas (wife of Christobal) was always refereed as MARIA GONZALEZ DE ISLAS. By the way in the same letters they believe that the father of MARIA GONZALEZ DE ISLAS was Blas de Islas. I don't know who is Blas de Islas. Also I don't know why in the letters the name of MARIA DE ISLAS is always MARIA GONZALEZ DE ISLAS. Then now I have 2 authors (book about Nochistlan and Holcombe/Montagna) that didn't believe that the father of MARIA GONZALEZ DE iSLAS (wife of Christobal) was Benito de Islas.

Saludos

Susana

Hi Susana,

I too descend from this couple and I'm confused by a couple of your statements. I'm familiar with the dispensa you refer to, but I'm unsure of what you're stating it's proof of. You tend to make definitive sounding statements and then offer very little in the way of actual proof. I can tell you I too am not sure who the parents of Maria de Isla married to Cristoval Lozano are either, but suggesting that Luisa de Isla, daughter of Maria de Isla, hija bastarda de Benito de Isla, most likely lived in Nochistlán and Maria de Isla, wife of Cristobal Martinez Lozano lived in Aguascalientes is rather unusual proof of anything. Are you suggesting that a child can't live in a different city from their parents? That's rather odd. Then you offer the statement, "Maria de isla and Christoval Lozano didn't have a daughter named Luisa de Isla." Are you saying you're not aware of a child named Luisa or that they definitely didn't have a daughter named Luisa?

I re-read the letters of Jaime Holcombe too and you have to remember that there are errors in even the best genealogical works.

So here's a question that maybe Chris or Manny or Alex can answer. In Holcombe's letters there's this passage about Nicolasa Ruiz de Esparza, daughter of Luisa Ruiz de Esparza who is the daughter of Pedro Ruiz de Esparza and Juana "Maria" Lozano:

“Y la pretensa (Nicolasa Ruiz de Esparza) es mestiza porque su padre es mestizo y su madre es casi india.” If Luisa de Esparza was “almost an Indian,” why, that takes back to her Grandparents, Lópe Ruiz de Esparza and Francisca de Gabay y Moctezuma; Cristóbal Martínez Lozano and María González de Islas. One of the witnesses was her Grandfather, Pedro Ruiz de Esparza y Gabay, married 2) Margarita González..."

So, Jaime Holcombe has Cristobal Martin Lozano and Maria de Islas as the parents of Juana "Maria" Lozano and obviously Lope Ruiz de Esparza and Francisca de Gabay y Moctezuma are the parents of Pedro Ruiz de Esparza. So if this dispensa is correct it would be "somewhat" proof of Maria de Isla being the mestiza daughter of Benito de Isla or it's another error.

We know that Pedro Ruiz de Esparza can't be the source of the indian blood. Even if Petronila de Moctezuma is the great granddaughter of Moctezuma, she wouldn't be india, at best she's castiza, which would make Ana Francisca Gabay y Moctezuma an española, making Pedro Ruiz de Esparza an español too.

So, if Holcombe is right and knowing that Pedro Ruiz de Esparza can't be the source of the indian blood than we're left with Cristobal Martin Lozano and Maria de Islas. We can rule out Cristobal Martin Lozano, since we know that all his ancestors were from Spain, so the only possible source of Luisa de Esparza's indian blood is Maria de Islas.

Still though it's probly an error, since we know that three quarters of her grandparents are españoles, at best, if Holcombe is correct, then Luisa de Esparza would only be castiza, certainly not casi india. Thoughts?

Danny C. Alonso

Genealogy Research