Someone in Brasil sent me today a pdf file of the ROCHA chapter from the 10 volume series of the Terceira families because they had a question about their possible link to the first one mentioned in there.
It was great to finally see that chapter, but if you have Rocha ancestors you will likely be very disappointed.
Many branches listed in there start with people who are descendants of my Rocha ancestors, but they don't connect the families and it's very incomplete.
There is a sizable collection from Doze Ribeiras which was nice to see, but again they stopped way short of tracing them back to the start of the records.
Maybe it's because they couldn't find the documents, like marriages that show the next older generation. Or maybe they weren't interested.
But I found some named Rocha Lourenco who are my fairly close cousins, 4th cousin of my father, and they completely botched the majority of their ancestry.
Here is the place where they went wrong. The formatting isn't quite right anymore, but I think you can follow it:
S MANUEL DA ROCHA - N. em S. Sebastião a 8.1.1763.
C.c. D. Rosa Joaquina - vid. DRUMMOND, § 4°, n° 8 -.
Filho:
C.c. D. Rosa Joaquina - vid. DRUMMOND, § 4°, n° 8 -.
Filho:
6 FRANCISCO DA ROCHA LOURENÇO - N. em S. Sebastião a 4.11.1805.
C.c. Gertrudes Mariana, filha de João de Aguiar e de Maria Joaquina.
Filhos:
7 Francisco da Rocha Lourenço, n. em S. Bento em 1824 e f. na Sé a 31.3.1899.
Proprietário.
C.c. D. Maria José da Rocha Barcelos - vid. BARCELOS, § 9°, n° 11 -.
Filha:
8 D. Maria, n. em Se' Luzia a 2.4.1881.
7 Manuel da Rocha Lourenço, que segue.
C.c. Gertrudes Mariana, filha de João de Aguiar e de Maria Joaquina.
Filhos:
7 Francisco da Rocha Lourenço, n. em S. Bento em 1824 e f. na Sé a 31.3.1899.
Proprietário.
C.c. D. Maria José da Rocha Barcelos - vid. BARCELOS, § 9°, n° 11 -.
Filha:
8 D. Maria, n. em Se' Luzia a 2.4.1881.
7 Manuel da Rocha Lourenço, que segue.
7 MANUEL DA ROCHA LOURENÇO - N. em S. Sebastião a 6.4.1838.
Lavrador.
C. em Se' Luzia com Joaquina Paula, n. em Se' Luzia, filha de Vitorino Machado e de Josefa
Vitorina.
Continuing further down the tree, it comes to the 4th cousin:
10 JOSÉ HENRlQUE SILVA ROCHA LOURENÇO -N. em St"Luziaa 10.5.1935.
Licenciado em Medicina (U.c., 1961), especialista em Otorrinolaringologia, director de
serviços do Hospital de Angra, condecorado com a medalha de Mérito Municipal de Angra do
Heroísmo (categoria de Mérito Profissional, 2004) e com a medalha de Mérito Aeronáutico da
Força Aérea Portuguesa (2005).
Licenciado em Medicina (U.c., 1961), especialista em Otorrinolaringologia, director de
serviços do Hospital de Angra, condecorado com a medalha de Mérito Municipal de Angra do
Heroísmo (categoria de Mérito Profissional, 2004) e com a medalha de Mérito Aeronáutico da
Força Aérea Portuguesa (2005).
I think the reason they even mentioned this Rocha branch is because this person is the director of the hospital in Angra.
Looking above at 7, Manuel da Rocha Lourenco, it says he was born in 1838 in Sao Sebastiao. That's simply wrong. In the margin of that baptism it says "Brazil" and makes me think this Manuel moved to Brasil.
The failure here is what's missing from this research. It is correct that he married in Santa Luzia, Angra to Joaquina Paula and those are her parents. But they neglected to find that marriage record.
Because if they had done that they would know he was not born in that year.
Person number 7, his brother Francisco da Rocha Lourenco is also correct and did marry Maria Jose de Barcelos. But again, they didn't find their marriage and should have looked for his baptism in Sao Bento.
Because if they did, they would see his grandparents are not who they say they are.
Person 6 and his two sons in the 7th generation, Manuel and Francisco, are all correct. But person 5, Manuel da Rocha and wife Rosa Joaquina, are a completely unrelated family.
I thought maybe they found a couple with the same names and just made a mistake. But it turns out they ignored the fact that Manuel born in 1838 in Sao Sebastiao was the son of a Faustina, not a Maria.
It's such a disservice to this Rocha Lourenco family. They probably thought they are getting a link to Drummond and the others listed and in reality, there is no connection.
The book jumps to the wrong conclusion as to why they used Rocha Lourenco when they started this branch:
1 CATARINA DA ROCHA - C.c. António Lourenço. Moradores no Porto Judeu na 2" metade do
século XVII. Os descendentes deste casal foram sempre conhecidos por Rocha Lourenço, embora
o apelido Lourenço só tenha sido incorporado definitivamente no nome a partir de Manuel da
Rocha Lourenço -
século XVII. Os descendentes deste casal foram sempre conhecidos por Rocha Lourenço, embora
o apelido Lourenço só tenha sido incorporado definitivamente no nome a partir de Manuel da
Rocha Lourenço -
They are assuming that Rocha comes from this Catarina and that 5 generations later they start using Lourenco with it.
There are so many Rocha Lourenco listings in the Terceira telephone book that probably everyone in Angra knows someone from this family.
And when you look through the records of Angra, you will see lots and lots of Rocha Lourenco families. But the reason they always used Rocha Lourenco is in honor of my ancestor Lourenco da Rocha.
And the real father of person number 6, Francisco da Rocha Lourenco, is Lourenco da Rocha. He only once used Lourenco da Rocha Homem and is the source of my Rocha Homem name.
His son Manuel was the only one who used Rocha Homem. All four of Manuel's brothers used Rocha Lourenco and they had large families. They account for all named Rocha Lourenco since about the late 1700s to the present.
I don't know if my message will ever make it to this cousin mentioned in the book so that he learns his true ancestry. I hope so.
But the biggest reason I wrote this long message is because it serves as an example for why one must not neglect the normal steps in documenting ancestors.
If they had simply looked for the marriages and they followed up with looking at their corresponding baptisms, they would have avoided such a gross mistake.
Instead, they put the wrong information together and got a mess. None of these records were difficult to read for someone who has practiced it. There is really no excuse for it.
This can also serve as a warning to anyone who assumes if it's written in a book, it must be true. Many mistakes are also found on the Minho website, NEPS. Use the information to your advantage, but verify every single fact and you'll be glad you did.
For anyone interested in the correct Rocha line, I have my direct paternal ancestry posted on my website in either my son Milan's or daughter Natalia's page in the Portuguese genealogy section.
As always, I welcome all discussion about Terceira and Pico ancestors. If you think you might be related to these people above, let me know.
Doug da Rocha Holmes
Sacramento, California
Pico & Terceira Genealogist
916-550-1618
Sacramento, California
Pico & Terceira Genealogist
916-550-1618
For options, such as changing to List, Digest, Abridged, or No Mail (vacation) mode, log into your Google account and visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Azores. Click in the blue area on the right that says "Join this group" and it will take you to "Edit my membership."
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Azores Genealogy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/azores.
