78
THE MESTA
second the dominant interest lies in the story of the relations of
that magistrate with the two bitterest foes of the Mesta, the
Cortes and the Chancillerias, or high appellate courts.
The first period comprises the history of the entregador during
the long centuries of the Mesta’s inception and its gradual crys-
tallization as a national institution under the watchful care of
the monarchy. The prestige of the Mesta and its itinerant pro-
tector rose to its greatest height at the close of this period, namely
during the first two-thirds of the sixteenth century. The crest
was reached at about the year 1568, when the Mesta took over
the proprietorship of the office of entregador. The title to the
incomes of the post had in the beginning belonged to the crown,
and later to various noble families under royal supervision. After
1568 the entregadores became internal officials of the Mesta, and
the greater part of the heavy fines which they levied were paid
into the treasury of that body. The Mesta was thenceforth the
!object of persistent onslaughts from its ancient opponents, the
local landowning and non-migratory pastoral interests. Begin-
ning in the first years of Philip Il’s reign, these carried on a relent-
less campaign against the entregadores in the high courts and in
the national assembly.
The two periods are by no means mutually exclusive. In other
words, the year 1568 does not mark the end of the relations of
Mesta and entregador with the crown; much less does it indicate
the beginning of the long struggle between the herdsmen and the
towns in the courts and the Cortes. It is, however, none the less
clear that the first three centuries of the rise of the Mesta are
dominated and indeed explained by the connection of that institu-
tion and its judiciary with the crown. Similarly, in the examina-
tion of the second period of the entregador’s history, we shall
find the story of the decline and disappearance of the office to be
centred around the stormy relations between the Mesta on the
one hand and the Cortes and the Chancillerias, or high courts, on
the other.
The opening topic of the charter of 1273 sheds important light
upon the essential characteristics of the entregador. In discuss-
ORIGINS OF THE ALCALDE ENTREGADOR
79
ing those sheep owners and shepherds who did not wish to be sub-
ject to the laws of the Mesta, it was stipulated that if “ anyone
does not care to be in it [the Mesta] and does not wish to give ad-
herence as the others [i. e., members] give . . . then your [the
Mesta’s] alcaldes should make him give and should seize him for
disobedience; and if they do not succeed, I order my entregadores
to help them and to make the culprits pay double.” 1 We have
here the first indication of a principle which was often enunciated
by later sovereigns, who appreciated the possibilities of exploiting
the pastoral industry through their control of the Mesta. The
latter, they declared, was all-inclusive and all shepherds were sub-
ject to its laws — a doctrine which suggests the attitude of many
gilds in other countries, and one which was insisted upon by the
Mesta and its royal patrons on many subsequent occasions.2
This earliest reference to the entregador of the Mesta is signif-
icant because it brings out at once the clear distinction between
the alcalde de Mesta or internal judge of that body, and the entre-
gador, the direct representative of the king. In some of the
later documents the former title has been applied to the entre-
gador. This fact probably accounts for the failure of practically
all investigators and critics of the Mesta, both contemporary and
modern, to point out the important distinction between these two
very different offices. By far the greater part of the abuse and
criticism of the Mesta, whether just or unjust, was directed at the
entregador, as being its chief defender. It is true that the Mesta
was theoretically more or less in control of that official and re-
sponsible for his acts. On stated occasions he was required to
report to the Mesta, as we shall see in a moment; furthermore,
the proprietary entregador-in-chief, who named the active
entregadores, was appointed by the king, nominally on the sug-
gestion of the Mesta. In spite of these facts, however, the entre-
gadores had a distinctly external position with reference to that
body. They were essentially crown officers, used as administra-
tive units by the monarchy and not by the gild of the herdsmen.
The direct nature of this connection between the entregador
and the crown is clearly established in many ways. Almost all of
j Quad. 1731, pt. ɪ, p. 4. , See below, pp. 262, 264.