In 1685, Pedro D’Asa, resident of Tacotan, was granted a sitio de ganado mayor con ocho caballerias de tierra, one league from Cuxpala, in the jurisdiction of Juchipila. The grant was contested by Cristobal Martinez Lozano de Lara, as it included some lands that his deceased father, Cristobal Lozano, had petition the court for, some 4 years previous. Lozano’s co-plaintiff in the suit was Juana Lopez Mercado, the widow & heir of Francisco Lozano de Lara, his deceased brother & co-heir, as well as executor of their father’s estate; she was represented by her father, Nicolas Lopez Mercado.

These Lozano’s had their casa de morada on the puesto called El Mesquital, in the jurisdiction of Juchipila. The elder Cristobal Lozano had died in Nochistlan, apparently some time between 1681 & 1685. According to the plaintiffs, they had in their possession land deeds and documents, some as old as 130 years, including a signed affidavit claiming that the documents regarding the lands in question were destroyed by fire (though in later pages, I believe the judges said the documents they presented went back no further than 60 years). On one page of this suit, Cristobal Martines Losano de Lara (as he signed his name) is called “Cristobal Losano de Montesuma.”

My question is: WHO ARE THEY??? What is their connection - if there is one - to Cristobal Martinez Lozano of Aguascalientes? And what is their connection to Moctezuma?

At first, from the given timeline, I thought the elder Cristobal Lozano might have been the son of Cristobal Martinez Lozano and Maria de Isla, of Aguascalientes; he could’ve owned lands in Juchipila, but, where would the “Lara” in his son’s surnames have come from? Cristobal Lozano de Isla was married to Mariana Gonzalez de Gardea, and as far as I know, she had no “Lara” in her ancestry. Plus, there is no record of these two having sons named Francisco and Cristobal. Another possibility is the older Cristobal Lozano was the son of Juan Lozano and Josepha Vasquez de Sandoval, baptized 5 Nov 1656 in Nochistlan, but he would’ve been too young to have a son of marrying age in 1685.

One thing I’ve noticed is that, representing Cristobal Martinez Lozano de Lara in this suit was Bartolome de Guzman y Santiesteban: this same Bartolome de Guzman y Santiesteban represented Juan Lozano de Gardea, when he expressed his wishes to ascend to higher orders on 26 Jan 1683. But for all I know, he was a solicitor from Guadalajara, and it is coincidental that he represented both parties.

Any thoughts?

Hope you’re all well!
Manny Díez Hermosillo