1671. Carta de Juan Escabías de Carvajal para Francisco Antonio Porcel de los Cobos.

Letter from Juan Escabías de Carvajal to Francisco Antonio Porcel de los Cobos.

The author assures Francisco Antonio Porcel that it is safe for him to go to Fernando lezcano´s village. He also states that his petition and his filiation are lawful.

In 1674 Francisco Antonio Porcel de los Cobos brought before the Justice his claim for the possession of the entailed state founded by Luisa de los Ríos (his paternal great-grandmother). At the time, the state was being managed by Fernando Melchor Amador de Lezcano y de los Ríos, a first cousin of the plaintiff´s alleged father. Admittedly, the claim was based on Francisco Antonio Porcel´s filiation, who assured being a natural son of Antonio Porcel and Antonia Godínez. In addition to the title deeds contemplating the direct legitimate line of succession, Francisco Antonio Porcel guaranteed to have a document signed by his grandfather, Francisco Porcel de Molina, proving his filiation. The defendant party presented several allegations in order to defend themselves from this claims. At first they focused in procedural questions, such as Fernando Melchor´s jurisdiction or the illegality of Francisco Antonio Porcel de los Cobos appearing before the Court as a poor man. However, the most relevant contradictions revolved around the plaintiff´s identity and filiation. First of all, they denied the defendant´s name as being Francisco Antonio Porcel de los Cobos and assured his real name was Francisco Martínez Peñalver, after the woman who mothered him: Catalina Peñalver, also known as “tía Peñalver” (aunt Peñalver). On the other hand, they doubted Antonio Porcel´s paternity, given that it was well known that Antonia Godínez had lived in an unlawful way and had had frequent affairs with several men, amongst them, her future husband, Antonio de Yzcara. But above all else, they insisted in the not genuine character of the document allegedly signed by Francisco Porcel de Molina. They based their argument not in the calligraphic survey, but in a testimony that referred to falsification of documents in exchange of money. Likewise, they provided witnesses who assured that the defendant was never treated as a relative or as Antonio Porcel´s natural son at Porcel´s household. Francisco Antonio Porcel de los Cobos provided several exhibits in order to prove his claim. Apart from the aforementioned documentation, he also presented letters proving he was treated as family by the Porcels (through his aunt, Catalina Gertrudis de Jesús María) and by the Godínezes. Besides, he had a statement from Fray Juan Godínez, Antonia Godínez´s brother, in which a detailed account of Antonio Porcel and Antonia Godínez´s relationship was given, including a document signed by Antonio Porcel in which he expresses his commitment to marry the girl. Nevertheless, Fernando Melchor argued against these testimonies and, quite specifically, against the letters. He not only considered them fake, but also not evidentiary, as well as complicating Francisco Antonio Porcel´s testimonial ratification. Therefore, in the case of Catalina Gertrudis´ letters, he considered they did not prove a previous acquaintance, given that she was aware of her nephew´s existence only after the correspondence began. And that seemed to be the case for the rest of the relatives, according to the information from the letters themselves. This opinion was shared regarding another group of letters written by Juan de Escabías Caravajal, not only because they were definitively false, but also because the defendant considered them not valid due to his litigation with the author´s sister, Francisca de Carvajal. In 1679, the Chancellery of Granada ruled that Francisco Antonio Porcel de los Cobos had not proved sufficiently his claim. The sentence was confirmed by the Council after taking it through a review process.