58
THE MESTA
flocks.1 Another curious form of annoyance suffered by the Mesta
was from the visits of itinerant winesellers among the shepherds,
whose services to their masters after such visits “ were worse than
valueless.” 2
In addition to the privileges just mentioned, the herdsmen were
exempt from summons as court witnesses; nor were they required
to leave their flocks in response to any other calls from local
officials, unless special permission had previously been granted by
the Mesta.3 Furthermore, they were to pay the royal taxes
Jeroicio, sisas, millones, and pechos) only in their home towns.4
It is evident, then, that the written laws undoubtedly made the
migratory shepherds one of the most favored of all the classes of
Castilian society; and the Mesta saw to it that these laws were
effectively enforced.
The wages of the migratory herdsman were nearly all paid in
kind at the close of his year’s services, which, like those of the non-
migratory shepherds,5 began on St. John the Baptist’s day (24
June).6 The legal wage in the middle of the fourteenth century
was twelve bushels (Janegas) of grain, one-fifth of the lambs born
in the flock during the year, one-seventh of the cheese produced
by his charges, and also six maravedis in coin for every hundred
sheep in his care.7 He was allowed to keep without charge a
ɪ These festivities were called mojaraches or monιarr aches. In Plasencia the name
of rey pðjaro was used, probably with reference to masquerading costumes imitating
birds. See below, p. 427. Arch. Mesta, P-3, Plasencia, 1542, gives an account of
the harm inflicted by such parties upon the neighboring shepherds and their flocks.
Cf. Y-ι, Yecla, 1559. Personal injuries to shepherds by such roysterers were
punishable by a uniform fine of fifteen sheep.
2 Arch. Mesta, Prov. i, 77 (1567). See above, p. 56.
3 Ibid., iii, 31 (1722): a revival of an older decree.
4 Quad. 173τ, pt. 1, p. 16 (1285); Arch. Mesta, Privs. RealesjIeg. 2, no. ɪ (1347)-
5 See above, p. 10. In addition to the references given there on local mestas and
sheep regulations, see the many clauses on shepherds in the fuero of Alarcon, 1252
(cited above, p. 24, n. 5), which may have served as a model for the Mesta charter
of 1273.
β Cortes, ii, p. 84, Valladolid, τ35r.
7 Ibid., p. 85. The value of the maravedi is one of the most perplexing prob-
lems in Spanish economic history. The usual basis for an approximate estimate ɪs
34 maravedis = r real = 25 centimes, but the great difference in the purchasing
power of the maravedi in its day and of the centime in its, is far too large and im-
INTERNAL ORGANIZATION OF THE MESTA
certain number of sheep of his own1 with the master’s flocks, and
was given the fells and carcasses of any animals killed by accident
while on the march. These rates of compensation varied greatly,
0f course, in different times and places, but the general principle
of payment in fractions of the produce, always excepting wool,
was common until the sixteenth century, when it began to go out
of use.2
59
With the above details in mind regarding the status and priv-
ileges of the individuals who may be called members of the Mesta,
the question naturally arises as to the actual number of such
persons. This query is by no means so readily answered as it is
asked. Curiously enough, the otherwise prolific archive of the
Mesta is almost entirely lacking in material on the subject. There
are no rolls of members or receipts for dues, nor do the minutes
show any individual votes, since all such expressions of opinion
were by quadrillas or districts. The only available sources bear-
ing on this point are a few records of tolls paid by members, with
indications as to the size of their flocks.
The usual observation on the problem has been that most of the
Mesta members were great nobles and ecclesiastics, with a scat-
tering of small owners who migrated only occasionally.3 It was
undoubtedly true that the Mesta had among its members a few
owners of large flocks of migrants. Such great names as those of
the Dukes of Béjar and of Infantazgo, and the monasteries of the
Escorial and of Guadalupe, appear frequently in the records of its
transactions during the centuries of its long life. But to say that
these large owners were typical of the industry, and that they
dominated all but a minor fraction of the migratory flocks, is far
less than half the truth. Even the meagre evidence available on
the subject shows that the flocks of these great cabanas were only
a small part of the total number of transhumantes, and that by
portant a factor to be disposed of here. Cf. N. Sentenach, “ El Maravedf ” in
Revista de Archives, xii (1905), pp. 195-220.
l The shepherds’ animals usually made up about ten per cent of the total flock.
2 Arch. Mesta, Acuerdos, 12 Sept., 1517: resolutions on the prevalence of pay-
ɪɪɪents in money.
3 Cf. Bourgoing, op.cit∙yiy ρ. 115; Pons, ope citsi and Laborde, op. cit.