Confirming the Altamirano Connection to Conquistador Fernando Cortés
- Apr 29, 2025
- 5 min read
Damien Aragon’s research on the ancestry of Francisco Valdés Altamirano led to the extraordinary finding that he was descended from several conquistadors who served under Fernando Cortés when the Spanish army and its native allies conquered Tenochtitlan (Mexico City) in 1521 (“Going by the Book: Further Research into the Valdés Altamirano Family,” in the September 2022 edition of the New Mexico Genealogist)
In the June 2024 edition of the New Mexico Genealogist, Damien and I worked with Karen Bowman to update and expand the Altamirano side of the family tree in our article “Corrections to the Genealogy of Juana Altamirano, Paternal Grandmother of Francisco Valdés Altamirano.” This investigation showed that Francisco’s ancestor Juan Altamirano was Cortés’ first cousin. I recently found more evidence that confirms Petronila Altamirano was married to Juan Altamirano (Saavedra) and reveals new information about him.
A manuscript from the year 1569 located in the Archivo General de la Nación (Mexico) describes a lawsuit between Petronila Altamirano and Hernán Gutiérrez Altamirano as executors of Juan Altamirano, deceased, and Don Martín Cortés, the Marquess of the Oaxaca Valley, who was Fernando Cortés’ first-born son and heir. Fernando was Juan’s first cousin and Don Martín was Juan’s second cousin, as shown in the diagram below.
In the lawsuit, the Altamiranos sued the Cortés estate for 348 pesos and 2 grains of gold for the salary owed to Juan Altamirano for a year and a month that he served as the alcalde mayor of the Villa of Coyoacán (Side note: anyone who has been to Mexico City knows that today Coyoacán is a trendy and bohemian neighborhood, home of the Frida Kahlo Museum).
The fact that Juan Altamirano Saavedra served as the alcalde mayor of Coyoacán, which was the encomienda assigned to Fernando Cortés, demonstrates just how close the two families were. Juan’s father Juan Altamirano Pizarro had served as the accountant for Cortés’ estate. The younger Juan had evidently maintained this relationship by being selected to govern the administrative seat of the Cortés family’s domains.
During the course of the lawsuit, we learn that Juan Altamirano Saavedra died on 20 March 1567 and that Petronila was the guardian and conservator of their children. Extrapolating from the baptism dates of their children and the fact that he was born in Mexico City, Juan would probably have been only about 37 years old when he died. Don Martín’s attorney argued that the money owed had already been paid, as demonstrated by a receipt of payment signed by Hernán Gutiérrez Altamirano. Hernán disputed this assertion and claimed that he had never received the payment.
“...de la dicha Doña Petronila Altamirano muger que fue de Juan Altamirano difunto como su albacea y tutora e curadora de sus hijos y del dicho difun- to y de Hernan Gutierrez Altamirano albacea...” | “...of the said Doña Petronila Altamirano, who was the wife of Juan Altamirano, deceased, as his executor and guardian and conservator of their children and the said deceased, and Hernan Gutierrez Altamirano executor...” |
The royal audiencia rendered its final judgment in the case on 25 October 1569, ordering Don Martín to make the full payment as requested by the Altamiranos. Doña Petronila’s assignee, Antonio Gómez, confirmed that he received payment from the royal officials on behalf of the Cortés estate on 3 January 1570.
Documents from several years earlier reveal that Petronila Altamirano was the daughter of Juan Gutiérrez Altamirano, and therefore a sister of (or at least half-sister) of Hernán Gutiérrez Altamirano. In 1560, Hernán engaged in legal proceedings with his younger brother Juan Alonso Altamirano over the inventory and partition of their father’s estate. Juan Alonso had not yet achieved the age of majority (25 years old) but argued that he was fully capable of managing his own affairs and no longer needed a guardian. One of the documents put forward as evidence in the case was the complete last will and testament of their father Juan Gutiérrez Altamirano, made in Mexico City on 30 September 1558. In it, he named his executors as: his son Hernán’s father-in-law, Don Luis de Castilla; his son Hernán and his son-in-law Juan Altamirano. The full passage reads:
“And to fulfill, pay, and execute my last will and testament, including bequests and charitable gifts contained therein for everything pertaining to my soul and it’s relief, I hereby appoint, name, and designate as my executors and testamentary administrators el señor Don Luis de Castilla, my consuegro (co-parent-in-law); the aforementioned Hernán Gutiérrez Altamirano, my son; and Juan Altamirano, my son-in-law. To each of them, acting jointly (in solidum), I grant full and complete authority to enter and take possession of my finest and most valuable assets I leave behind and to sell them in public auction (or by other means). I direct that the resulting maravedís and gold pesos from those sales they shall use to fulfill and pay all obligations arising from this my last will and testament, including bequests and charitable gifts. I entrust and commend my soul to their care, charging them to carry out and execute these instructions with all possible speed.”
One secondary source that reports on the descendants of the Altamirano family, Los Condes de Santiago, published in 1901 by Aejandro Villaseñor y Villaseñor (p. 13), gives the incorrect relationship between the executor Juan Altamirano and Juan Gutiérrez Altamirano. He states that the executors of the will were Juan’s consuegro Don Luis de Castilla, and his sons, Hernando and Juan Altamirano. The passage above shows that Juan Altamirano was not his son (who was Juan Alonso), but his son-in-law.
The only individuals named Juan Altamirano who were close enough to the family to be named as an executor were Juan Altamirano Saavedra and his father, Juan Altamirano Pizarro, who were both alive and residents of Mexico City at the time. However, we know that the elder Juan Altamirano was married to María de Sandoval, who was the daughter of Pedro López de Saavedra and Isabel Álvarez Rangel, so he was not the executor. The younger Juan was married to Petronila Altamirano, so she must have been Juan Gutiérrez Altamirano’s daughter. Another document from the same file which details the disposition of the estate of Juan Gutiérrez Altamirano specifies that Juan Altamirano el mozo (the younger) was the one named as the executor.
But if Petronila was the daughter of Juan Gutiérrez Altamirano, why didn’t he name her in his will? I suspect it was because she was already married and her father had provided a dowry for her marriage to Juan Altamirano Saavedra. Therefore, she had no further claim on her father’s estate. Additional documents specifying their relationship would strengthen this finding. I will post any new information I find in a future update.
Updated 21 May 2026.
Subscribe to the blog to receive email updates.
Sources:
Archivo General de la Nación
Hospital de Jesús, Caja 205, Expediente 46, Legajo 107, "Mandamiento de lo determinado en el pleito entre Antonio Gómez, cesionario de Petronila Altamirano, y los bienes secuestrados del marqués del Valle, relativo a una deuda de 348 pesos del salario que se le debía a Juan Altamirano, difunto, como alcalde mayor que fue de la villa de Coyoacán," Repositorio Documental Digital https://repositorio.agn.gob.mx/busqueda?idDesc=5d1a9abb-7e91-4beb-897a-ed6a5cb2df98
Vínculos y Mayorazgos, Volumen 4, Expediente 1, “Sobre el mayorazgo fundado por don Juan Gutiérrez Altamirano, tierras en Coyoacán, Tacubaya y valle de Matalzingo,” Repositorio Documental Digital
Alejandro Villaseñor y Villaseñor, Los Condes de Santiago: Monografía Histórica y Genealógica (Mexico: El Tiempo, 1901).
The reference to "Spanish Army" in the introduction of the post albeit is conventional wisdom is at best misleading and deceptive at worst. Matthrew Restall in his Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest, cogently argues that term "soldier" incorrectly depicts the conquerors as the action arm of the king "granting the "Spanish royal state" to take a "monolithic and directives role in Spanish expansion" which Restall calls the "myth of the king's army." And so. how did they seem themselves Restalll asks. In the main, to "acquire wealth and status." To quote James Lockhart, "free agents, emigrants, settlers, unsalaried, and ununiformed earners of encomiendas and shares of treasure."
Moreover, Spanish army denotes large numbers of fighting men. The most fight…
Thank you for posting
Excellent find thanks for posting.