82
THE MESTA
the latter title until it was sold to the Mesta, in 1568, for 750,000
maravedis.1
The entregador mayor derived his income from the office by
farming out certain districts as itineraries to subordinate entre-
gadores. Nevertheless the crown continued to keep in close
touch with all such magistrates, even to the extent of occasion-
ally naming them regardless of the prerogative of the entre-
gador-in-chief. Such a royal nomination of an entregador for a
particular district or route was usually made with the consent of
the Mesta members of that section.2 The practice of consulting
these members fell into disuse, however, as the central authority
represented by the king and the titled proprietor of the entre-
gadorship grew stronger. Finally, in 1419, when the Mesta en-
deavored to revive its old prerogative, the Carrillo and Acuna
families, proprietors of the office at the time, readily secured a
peremptory royal refusal to the sheep owners’ petition.3 There-
after the staff of entregadores, both chief and subordinates, was
even more clearly defined as a corps of distinctly royal officers.
The powerful nobles named above, who controlled the entre-
gadores under John II and Henry ΓV, taking full advantage of the
these officials from 1417 onward. On the Count of Buendfa’s appointment, see also
Acad. Hist.. Ms. E-127, fols. 183-185. There is a brief account of the historic
Buendfa family in the Bolelin de la Sociedad CasteUana de Excursiones (Valladolid,
ιgoι S.), iii, p. 143.
l Quad. 1731, pt. 2, p. 259.
s Arch. Ayunt. Cuenca, Becerro, fols. 25-27: the royal letter of appointment of
an entregador, dated September, 13∞: “ . . . IospastoresdelacanadadeCuenca
me enbiaron pedir merced que les diesse por mio alcalde y entregador en la canada
de Cuenca a Roy Ferrandez, cauallero de Cuenca, y yo touelo por bien ... y
mando que oya las querellas que acaescieren entre Ios pastores y Ios de la tierra, y
les faga las entregas. . . .” An appointment of 1308 is similarly worded. Arch.
Hist. Nac., Calatrava Docs. Reales, iii, no. 165. In another of 1306, however (ibid.,
no. 163) there is no consent indicated on the part of any Mesta members. The
latter document is further indicative of the crown’s immediate control over the
entregador by the delineation of the jurisdiction of the appointee “ . . . en todas
las cafladas, salue en las villas y Iugares de la reyna mi madre.” This exemption
of the queen’s lands was stipulated in most of the entregador appointments previ-
ous to the sixteenth century. There is also a notable Coneordia or agreement be-
tween the Mesta and Queen Leonora, dated 1423, on this subject. Arch. Mesta,
P-6, Puebla de Montalbin, 1423.
’ Arch. Mesta, S-5, Siguenza, 1792.
ORIGINS OF THE ALCALDE ENTREGADOR
weakness of the crown, had their tenure and jurisdiction secured
by a series of letters patent which afforded them ample protection
against the protests of local officials and even of the Mesta itself.
They seem to have been particularly insistent upon the enforce-
ment of the old requirement which brought all complaints against
the entregadores before the king himself: a provision which, after
all, was not without some reason, since the greater part of the pro-
tests arose from conflicting exemptions granted by the crown, on
the one hand to the towns and on the other to the Mesta.1 In a
word, the whole tendency of the time was steadily toward the
concentration of the supervision of the Mesta in the hands of
officers of the central government.
The most significant step in this direction came in 1454, when
the king appointed Pedro de Acuna, “ my counsellor and chief
guard, for many and good services rendered, to be the entrega-
dor mayor.” 2 By this appointment the chief entregador was
made the means of communication between the crown and the
Mesta, because of his dual status as personal adviser to the
sovereign and director of the most important officials of the
Mesta. Through him were conveyed the royal orders and grants
of favors to that body. He protected the interests of the crown
at all Mesta meetings, and brought to those semiannual functions
a dignity and prestige which they had not previously enjoyed.
From the Mesta’s point of view, the designation of a member
of the Royal Council as entregador-in-chief was most important.
It meant that the herdsmen would have a representative con-
stantly near the sovereign to plead their cause. The inauguration
of this practice of having some important Mesta official in con-
stant attendance upon the king gave the sheep owners a marked
advantage, which they were to use most effectively in the sixteenth
century in the struggles with their less favored and unorganized
opponents. With this state of affairs in mind, we are quite pre-
ɪ Arch. Mesta, F-2, Fuente Pinilla, 1509: an entregador’s commission of 1435
in which the local judges are threatened with loss of office for failure to present all
questions of difference between themselves and the entregador before the king.
There was a similar provision in a commission of 1339: Arch. Hist. Nac., CaIatr.
Docs. Reales, iff, no. 220.
, Arch. Mesta, F-2, Fuente Pinilla, 1509.