I'm sure that the corregedor was from outside the island as well. But there could be two Licenciados, almost contemporaries, one corregedor and the other not sharing a ratter common and even epidemic name. I did not know that note by Cabral do Nascimento who deserves consideration, neither I have ever seen the document. I give him however much credit. However, to present that document on court, and based on solid facts defy Cabral de Nascimento authority would be momentous ; -)) On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Paulo Santos Perneta <[email protected]>wrote: > No way that the king would allow the corregedor to be a guy from > Funchal, son of a former alcaide, brother in law of a powerful > businessman, with a whole set of clientèle ready to ask for favours > and claiming paybacks. The corregedors were always - correct me if I'm > wrong - where always people from outside the Island, so that they > would not be hostage to the circles of influences already established. > > Licº Francisco Rodrigues, the corregedor, was married to Ana de > Guimarães. That guy should be spinning around in his tomb seeing what > some selfish, unscrupulous freak trying to nobilitate his own family > has done to the christening records of his sons. No, he's not the > Gouveia, and I believe that he has not left any descendants here. > After his service in the Island he probably returned to Portugal, to > wherever he came from. > > Now, about "Licº Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia" - the record of his > marriage is noted in the ARM database textually as such, in the notes > field: "O Dr. Cabral do Nascimento, em nota na folha de rosto do > livro, considerou este registo apócrifo, não aconselhando, portanto, a > emissão de certidões. Intromissão de letra posterior, entrelinhada.". > Of course, they could disregard his advice and issue the certificate > anyway, but I defy anyone to hold such a thing on court. > > Paulo > > > Miguel de Castro Henriques <[email protected]> wrote > in Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:23:45 +0000: > > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Fernandes, Jose < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Miguel, > >> After a good night's reflection (?), I won't discuss my opinion on > whether > >> in the present unitary constitution of the Portuguese Republic, > Madeira's > >> regional government has the power of a "state" (Estado), but let's just > >> consider that in this case ARM has taken a position. Consider that in > spite > >> of the certificate saying that Beatriz is a Gonçalves Leão de Chamorro, > they > >> have not incorporated that when they digitalized the info. I mean that > you > >> put that name in the Data base and you get nothing. That is not normal. > Why > >> did they do that? > >> > > > > The omnipotent and menacing shade of god-the-father! I mean probably the > > ghost of Meneses Vaz paralyzed them. So they co-opted. They compromised, > and > > instead of her full name they just wrote Beatriz Chamorra, but they > conceded > > the Dr,.(instead of Licenciado) to Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia. > > > > Now there was for sure an archi-famous Licenciado Francisco Rodrigues - > > never referred as de Gouveia - around 1555 and 1557. He was corregedor, ( > > corregedor da Capitania da Cidade do Funchal, Procurador das Capellas, > > Orphãos e Resíduos e fazenda, etc. com larguissimos poderes e Alçada, > porque > > além das Corregedroias das Comarcas lhe dá a do Capitam (a do Zarco) and > in > > short, he had more power than the "Capitam" of Madeira who naturally was > a > > Gonçalves Zarco . > > > > That corregedor became famous not only because of his actions, but > because > > he had majestic powers as no one had before him. He was "governador, > ouvidor > > e Vedor da fazenda. He had at his service as "escrivão" and "chanceler da > > correição" Jerónimo Vieira, moço-fidalgo, and more personnel. > > Anyway during the period of time that Francisco Rodrigues had the > government > > he ruled the three "Capitanias" of Madeira archipelago. (More than Jardim > > today!) ; -))) > > > > > > > >> So, uisnng your argument all the ARM is guaranteeing is that she is a > >> Beatriz Chamorra. > > > > > > Not only that, even more important than that, the ARM is guaranteeing > that > > Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia is "de Gouveia" and Licenciado, and > > historically speaking he is infinitely more important than Beatriz > Chamorra. > > > > > > But one point not clarified remains. Is the famous corregedor Francisco > > Rodrigues the same as Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia? That's one of the > > major points to be cleared. As Francisco Rodrigues is quite a common name > > there could be, there could even be two Licenciados with almost the same > > name, no big deal. > > > > > >> Now, you and I, know that the possibility of another Francisco Rodrigues > >> Gouveia, Licenciado marrying a Beatriz Chamorra at this time in Funchal, > >> Madeira is highly improbable. > >> > > > > And that would be almost absolutely improbable. In that time there were > very > > few people of both sides (Rodrigues de Gouveia and Chamorros) to have > that > > circumstance happening. > > > > > >> Therefore I agree with you but we are still at a dead's end with > beatriz. > >> > > > > It has some shades of a dead end situation. But has some vistas over > other > > possibilities. So it's not a total dead end, rather a dead end with > openness > > and some light at the end of the end of the tunnel. > > > > > > > >> Keep exercising! > >> > > > > I will, for sure. Give it a try! > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Miguel > > > > > > > >> Cheers, > >> José > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] [mailto: > >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Miguel de Castro > Henriques > >> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 5:07 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [PT-MADEIRA] Licenciado Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia > >> > >> Mine is certified. You can ask docs. from ARM in two ways; a( as simple > >> photocopy . has no kegal value, B) Certified. With the official stamp, > it > >> has legal value. It's a certified document that you may use in any legal > >> undertake. > >> > >> So what ARM is saying when it puts the official stamp is: we guarantee > that > >> all that this document states is true. And that's precisely what is a > legal > >> document about. True facts. Not forgeries. > >> > >> Pilates is really great exercise ; -)) > >> > >> Miguel > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Miguel de Castro Henriques < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Fernandes, Jose < > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Miguel, > >> >> Great arguments. However, many of the copies are not certified. Does > >> that > >> >> change any of your arguments? > >> >> I am with you. Now Pilates class? Is this a misspelling? If not is > this > >> >> the Pilates from Palestine? What he is doing giving classes in > Portugal? > >> >> Wait I know. I will keep it to myself. I heard that the present gov't > >> has > >> >> many spies!!!!! > >> >> > >> >> Just kidding... > >> >> José > >> >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: [email protected] [mailto: > >> >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Miguel de Castro > >> Henriques > >> >> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:36 PM > >> >> To: [email protected] > >> >> Subject: Re: [PT-MADEIRA] Licenciado Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Fernandes, Jose < > >> >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Miguel, > >> >> > I agree with you. Do you think all of this might have to do with > the > >> >> Cunha > >> >> > case? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> José, > >> >> > >> >> I really don't see very well the Rodrigues de Gouveia faking all > these > >> >> documents (or asking someone to do it) to win the case against the > all > >> >> powerful Pedro Álvares da Cunha. The documents had to be checked and > >> >> re~checked. Pedro Álvares da Cunha was too big a fish to get > swallowed > >> by > >> >> any amount of fake documents. He had the best lawyers and court > people > >> and > >> >> experts working for him. They would detect the slightest > irregularities > >> in > >> >> the papers and documents. Even better than any of us and perhaps any > >> >> contemporary expert. It was their world, their language, their style > of > >> >> writing. They would be able to detect fakers and forgeries quite > easily. > >> >> People from these days were subtle..\ Just have a look at their > >> >> handwriting > >> >> many times elegant, precise, elaborate.and each one seemed to have > its > >> >> personal style. Just compare to today's handwriting- generally > >> amorphous, > >> >> poor, without style. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On other hand the document from which I started all my considerations > is > >> >> from the ARM database. Now, let me tell this. The ARM is a provider > of > >> >> legal documents. The documents we ask to ARM has in its database have > >> >> legal > >> >> force to prove something like : our being candidates to a heritage, > >> asking > >> >> for a title of nobility, asking for a coat of arms, wanting to change > >> our > >> >> name and surname and proving an ancestor had that name, etc. I mean > >> every > >> >> register in the ARM is not there per chance. It had to be > demonstrated > >> >> that > >> >> it was accurate, before they included it in their database. So every > >> >> marriage doc. every baptismal goes through the hands of experts. > >> Forgeries > >> >> are no admissible, since they are legal documents guaranteed by the > >> >> State.. > >> >> Otherwise no one would take seriously that ARM and its database. Of > >> >> course, > >> >> even so, an extremely clever and old forgery could pass the eyes of > >> >> experts. > >> >> Though the filters are more and more accurate. I believe we are now > in > >> the > >> >> 2nd and third generation of experts in the ARM after its foundation. > >> >> Second, > >> >> at least, though João Cabral could be my ggfather. Moreover they have > a > >> >> tradition of very good professionalism. So if they admit a document > in > >> >> their > >> >> database it is only after close scrutiny by experts on the field.. > And > >> for > >> >> scientific and legal reasons it can not be otherwise. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> So we have here an interesting case. If the doc. I have mentioned is > a > >> >> forgery, then the experts of the ARM were not able to identify it. > But I > >> >> doubt it very strongly. What interests more a genealogist are > precisely > >> >> the > >> >> two first centuries of Madeiran documents. It's there that their > >> attention > >> >> is more focused. So, i think that the document I have (the photocopy > of > >> >> it) > >> >> is sound and clear and moreover authenticated by ARM experts. I can > use > >> it > >> >> legally to prove that for instance for having a claim for using the > >> >> Chamorros coat of arms,. since I descend from them with only three > >> breaks > >> >> on > >> >> the male lineage. I won't, of course. But that's an open possibility > for > >> >> somebody else who requires the services of the ARM and finds the very > >> same > >> >> document and wants to do that precislçey that. And the ARM documents > >> have > >> >> that legal force, they are decisive and final proof. That's why they > are > >> >> authenticated, with the seal of the Government. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > One could pick sides in all of this! > >> >> > It is too bad that Paulo is m.i.a., for he had a strong feeling > about > >> >> this. > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Yes. He had a strong stand on all this - But I don't have his > particular > >> >> opinion on this document. He contested others. Not this one. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > It is possible that he just chose to believe Bernardo. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Yes. He is a bit fast IMO dismissing the document. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Howver, you make a good case. So what do we do now? Throw out the > >> >> Carvalho > >> >> > Pais? > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Not yet, though I am not clinging to them specially. Half of Portugal > >> >> descends from the Carvalhos de Basto, from which the Carvalhos pais > are > >> >> minor madeiran branch. > >> >> > >> >> I think we have to study where this Leam link leads. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Hope you are feeling a bit warmer. > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Yeah. Just came from my Pilates class, and am feeling OK. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Miguel > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > José > >> >> > > >> >> > -----Original Message----- > >> >> > From: [email protected] [mailto: > >> >> > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Miguel de Castro > >> >> Henriques > >> >> > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 1:48 PM > >> >> > To: [email protected] > >> >> > Subject: Re: [PT-MADEIRA] Licenciado Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia > >> >> > > >> >> > On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Fernandes, Jose < > >> >> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > Miguel, > >> >> > > I am just reading the Rodrigues de Gouveia genealogy, and on note > #8 > >> >> > > Bernado Gomes Ferreira (?) writes that there is acertificate of > >> >> marriage > >> >> > > for out two, but " existe-mas é como não existisse. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Ah good find José. I missed it. > >> >> > > >> >> > Obscure words, he said. Anyway he ought to refer to it with more > >> >> precision, > >> >> > IMO. And I think that the document is valid, and was all written by > >> the > >> >> > hand > >> >> > of Vicente Afonso, cura. > >> >> > > >> >> > Now there is no doubt for me that it was written by the Cura > Vicente > >> >> > Afonso. > >> >> > And signed, among others by João Rodrigues Escórcio, who later > acted > >> as > >> >> > testamenteiro of the will of F.co Rodrigues de Gouveia, thus > >> confirming > >> >> > their relationship. > >> >> > > >> >> > However I don't know if Menses Vaz is referring the same document. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > ..E uma cousa inautêntica" and that's why in Bernardo's opinion > Vaz > >> >> did > >> >> > not > >> >> > > pay attention to it. What do you think of that? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > I think that Menses Vaz had a misfired shot. The document seems to > me > >> >> > "cousa > >> >> > autêntica". It would perhaps alter Menses Vaz genealogy of the > >> Carvalho > >> >> > Pais > >> >> > (as far as beatriz Chamorra is regarded), so the horrified > magister > >> >> send > >> >> > the document to hell, without having the trouble to explain why. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > I guess I am having problems with an Italian connection!!! > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > mmmm. Italian connections are always problematic ; -))) > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Miguel > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > José > >> >> > > > >> >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> >> > > From: [email protected] [mailto: > >> >> > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Miguel de Castro > >> >> > Henriques > >> >> > > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 11:43 AM > >> >> > > To: [email protected] > >> >> > > Subject: Re: [PT-MADEIRA] Licenciado Francisco Rodrigues de > Gouveia > >> >> > > > >> >> > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Fernandes, Jose < > >> >> > > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Miguel, > >> >> > > > Interesting that the family, as you know, uses Pacheco > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Yes, for two generations they use Gouveia Pacheco. And with that > >> name > >> >> > they > >> >> > > administer the "Capela" from the morgadio established by Rodrigo > >> Anes > >> >> and > >> >> > > Isabel Pires.. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > and only much later goes back to the Rodrigues de Gouveia. That > is > >> >> > > somewhat > >> >> > > > unusual, unless the other names were more powerful. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > To add to Beatriz's parents' confusion, please remember that > later > >> a > >> >> > > Brites > >> >> > > > Chamorra wins that famous name trial re: Cunha because her > >> ancestors > >> >> > were > >> >> > > Da > >> >> > > > Cunha from the Carvalho Pais. So at some time we have to deal > with > >> >> that > >> >> > > > side. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > That famous trial is a powerful piece. As you know they won > against > >> D. > >> >> > > Pedro > >> >> > > Álvares da Cunha, a grandee of the the Kingdom, Trinchante-Mor da > >> Casa > >> >> > > Real, > >> >> > > (he was also Governor of Madeira), from the archi-noble Cunhas da > >> >> Tábua. > >> >> > So > >> >> > > they probably had access to some documentation that meanwhile was > >> >> lost. > >> >> > > Anyway, nice to watch, the obscure Rodrigues de Gouveia defeating > >> that > >> >> > Big > >> >> > > Fish. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Miguel, I real believe that Vaz was not aware of the marriage > in > >> Sé. > >> >> In > >> >> > > the > >> >> > > > genealogy, he says that Francisco married around 1540 or later. > So > >> >> he > >> >> > > wasn't > >> >> > > > aware of this certificate or if he was he dismissed it. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > I was surprised to see on RTPi that Setubal today was going > colder > >> >> than > >> >> > > the > >> >> > > > interior! > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Well, I didn't know about that. For the moment it is a sunny > sunny > >> >> day, > >> >> > > cold > >> >> > > as ice. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > I am on my 3d cup of steaming tea. One has to drink it fast > >> otherwise > >> >> it > >> >> > > gets cold in no time at all. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > José > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> >> > > > From: [email protected] [mailto: > >> >> > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Miguel de > Castro > >> >> > > Henriques > >> >> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 10:56 AM > >> >> > > > To: [email protected] > >> >> > > > Subject: Re: [PT-MADEIRA] Licenciado Francisco Rodrigues de > >> Gouveia > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > José, > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Miguel, > >> >> > > > > Congratulations on this find! I believe you and I (among > others) > >> >> > share > >> >> > > > this > >> >> > > > > family. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Thanks. I'm just amazed how this escaped the genealogists. > Were > >> >> they > >> >> > > > kindly > >> >> > > > leaving something for us to discover? ; -) > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Yes, I have at least two or three lines to our Gaspar > Rodrigues. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia is my great (12) grandfather and > is > >> >> > though > >> >> > > > > his son Gaspar that the line continues until our marriage > with > >> >> > > > Escolástica > >> >> > > > > de Bettencourt. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Yes, the "Morgadinha" ; -) Fortunately I downloaded all the > >> >> Rodrigues > >> >> > de > >> >> > > > Gouveia > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > I suspect you don't have the original marriage certificate > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > I have a photocopy of the original. (The priest had a > magnificent > >> >> > > > handwriting, clear, elegant, incisive). The addition of beatriz > >> glz > >> >> de > >> >> > > leam > >> >> > > > (no capital letters) > >> >> > > > is his, no doubt. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > and that if you did, would you be able to scan it and send it > to > >> >> my > >> >> > > > > personal account. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > For the moment I am planning to buy a scanner. The old one is > >> kaput. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Otherwise, I will be ordering the certificate. > >> >> > > > > I also have the Vaz geneology, where I got most of my > >> information, > >> >> > and > >> >> > > I > >> >> > > > > share your amazement that they did not seem to be aware of > the > >> >> Leão > >> >> > > > > connection. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > It escaped them. I can't see another explanation. It has the > clues > >> >> to > >> >> > > find > >> >> > > > out who were Beatriz Gonçalves de Leam de Chamorro's parents. > She > >> >> must > >> >> > > be > >> >> > > > one of the persons from that era with the longest name. Trivial > as > >> >> it > >> >> > is > >> >> > > > today for a Portuguese to have 4 names, it wasn't in those > times. > >> >> > > > It would have been signaled. > >> >> > > > Also there is the fact that she's called "de Chamorra". Unusual > >> >> among > >> >> > the > >> >> > > > Chamorras who never used that "de" > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > But what do we have here? First the son of Francisco Rodrigues > de > >> >> > Gouveia > >> >> > > > and Beatriz Chamorra, is Rui Chamorro, Almost as a rule the > sons > >> >> used > >> >> > > their > >> >> > > > father's name. Not in this case. What can it mean? It means > that > >> the > >> >> > > > Chamorro name was more important than the Rodrigues de Gouveia. > So > >> >> this > >> >> > > > allows us to conjecture that their Chamorro was linked with the > >> top > >> >> > > > Chamorros, descendants of the "Porteiro dos cativos", Pedro > >> >> Chamorro, > >> >> > > FCR. > >> >> > > > Otherwise he would have used, as Gapsar did, the Rodrigues de > >> >> Gouveia > >> >> > > name. > >> >> > > > Though there are no strict rules. And everything is possible as > >> >> regards > >> >> > > use > >> >> > > > of names of the parents. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > You don't have Brites parents? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > No. In the Carvalho Pais title our Brites Chamorra is presented > as > >> >> dau. > >> >> > > of > >> >> > > > Brites Chamorra married to a Carvalho Pais. It was the > respectable > >> >> > > Meneses > >> >> > > > Vaz who wrote that title. However due to new data it's, to say > the > >> >> > least, > >> >> > > > questionable. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > But now with the Gonçalves de Leam clue we're forced to admit > that > >> >> she > >> >> > > was > >> >> > > > the dau, of a Gonçalves de Leam and a Chamorra. Remember in > that > >> >> time > >> >> > the > >> >> > > > first name was the father's, the second the mother's name. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > All we can say it that we added more Italian blood, the Leam > >> >> (Leone?) > >> >> > to > >> >> > > > our > >> >> > > > tree. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > They were not available on the Vaz list. So, Vaz may not have > >> >> known. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > That's what surprises me. If he knew he did not show it. If he > did > >> >> not > >> >> > > show > >> >> > > > it but he knew it, well....But, genealogically speaking, he had > >> too. > >> >> > It's > >> >> > > > too fundamental a clue to be discarded. Anyway for Vaz a > bastard > >> >> line > >> >> > was > >> >> > > > not a matter of shame, or something to hide (like HHN did > >> >> sometimes). > >> >> > > > Furthermore the Leam were "good" families, top bourgeoisie. > >> perhaps > >> >> > even > >> >> > > > descendants of Italian nobility, They were linked to the > Spínolas. > >> >> And > >> >> > > the > >> >> > > > Spínolas were one of the top Madeiran families. So this Leam > link > >> >> that > >> >> > > > Beatriz undoubtedly carries "had" perforce to be explored. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Bastard line? > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > I don't think so.Furthermore with such a big name. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > The Alentejo cold does help your research! > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > Thanks Siberian cold on the way, "Vaga de frio monumental" > >> >> > Scandianavian > >> >> > > > countries 41 degrees below zero (Fahrenheit scale). > Temperatures > >> >> below > >> >> > > zero > >> >> > > > in Portugal interior. handle me that rum, or vodka or whatever, > >> >> please! > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Miguel > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > José > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > -----Original Message----- > >> >> > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto: > >> >> > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Miguel de > Castro > >> >> > > > Henriques > >> >> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 7:46 PM > >> >> > > > > To: [email protected] > >> >> > > > > Subject: [PT-MADEIRA] Licenciado Francisco Rodrigues de > Gouveia > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > I found an old marriage register to which I did not concede > >> much > >> >> > > > > importance > >> >> > > > > at the time. Now I see that it connects with a discussion > about > >> >> F.co > >> >> > > > > Rodrigues de Gouveia we had here a year ago or so. Was he > >> >> Licenciado > >> >> > or > >> >> > > > > not? > >> >> > > > > Was it a forgery? (his marriage document, as Paulo > contended). > >> >> Well, > >> >> > it > >> >> > > > > seems that it was not. Let's see why. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Anyway here we go. It's the marriage certificate of Isabel > Leal > >> m. > >> >> > Rui > >> >> > > > > Chamorro, (1577, Sé do Funchal). > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > She is the dau, of F.co da Costa de Siqueira and Leonor > >> Rodrigues. > >> >> > (The > >> >> > > > > Costa de Siqueira were noble, and are relatively well known). > >> Him, > >> >> > Rui > >> >> > > > > Chamorro, son of Licenciado Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia > >> >> (already > >> >> > > dead) > >> >> > > > > and his wife - and here is the surprise ..*.Beatriz Gonçalves > de > >> >> Leam > >> >> > > de > >> >> > > > > Chamorra !!* > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > The document is original, The words "Gonçalves de Leam de" > were > >> >> added > >> >> > > > with > >> >> > > > > the very same writing of the priest who wrote the document (I > >> have > >> >> no > >> >> > > > doubt > >> >> > > > > about it. It was the priest. It's not an added and clever > >> forgery, > >> >> i > >> >> > > bet > >> >> > > > > strongly on that). Anyway It's a name extraodinarily long for > >> that > >> >> > > time. > >> >> > > > > And > >> >> > > > > containing explosive and brand new information. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > The Leão were from Italian origin, merchants. "Mercadores do > >> >> trauto > >> >> > do > >> >> > > > > assucar" (They came very early to Madeira, around 1472). They > >> >> > > established > >> >> > > > > themselves in Funchal.They were later and, no surprisingly, > >> >> connected > >> >> > > by > >> >> > > > > marriage with the Spínolas.. They were upper bourgeoisie, at > >> >> least. > >> >> > > > > A Licenciado Diogo de Leão existed around that time. Probably > a > >> >> > > relative? > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > In this document we have evidence that a Licenciado Francisco > >> >> > Rodrigues > >> >> > > > de > >> >> > > > > Gouveia truly existed. So in face of this document we are > forced > >> >> to > >> >> > say > >> >> > > > he > >> >> > > > > is documented and his full name was truly Francisco Rodrigues > de > >> >> > > Gouveia. > >> >> > > > > Now he was supposed to be married to a just Brites Chamorra > by > >> >> > several > >> >> > > > > leading genealogists (Meneses Vaz included) > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Here from ARM database: Francisco Rodrigues de Gouveia, Dr. > >> >> > > > > Beatriz > >> >> > > > > Chamorra Sé 1539 46 7 v.º > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > But how come no one mentioned the "Gonçalves de Leam" of > Beatriz > >> >> > > > Chamorra? > >> >> > > > > It was mandatory! Because it's an extremely interesting and > >> >> central > >> >> > > > detail > >> >> > > > > which could lead to a connection, still unknown , between the > >> Leão > >> >> > and > >> >> > > > the > >> >> > > > > Chamorros. What is said here is that it (that connection) > >> >> blatantly > >> >> > > > > existed. > >> >> > > > > This Chamorra had Leam (Leão) blood. That no genealogist said > it > >> >> > > before. > >> >> > > > > And > >> >> > > > > that, just amazes me. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > The witness were João Rodrigues Escórcio - well known > character. > >> >> Joam > >> >> > > > > Carvalho. Pedro Feo (Feio) and Francisco Jorge. All the > witness > >> as > >> >> is > >> >> > > > > fitting for the marriage of a Licenciado could read and > write. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > I think Joam Carvalho was a judge. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Anyway all this is really groovy and juicy. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > I leave here this info.because I think very strange that none > of > >> >> the > >> >> > > > > leading > >> >> > > > > genealogists (of reference, I know and studied almost them > all > >> but > >> >> I > >> >> > > > won't > >> >> > > > > quote all their names) referred it. Especially those who > wrote > >> >> the > >> >> > > > > Rodrigues de Gouveia title as well as the Lopes Esteves title > >> >> (patent > >> >> > > in > >> >> > > > > the > >> >> > > > > old and regreted NESOS). Had they seen it they were > "condemned" > >> to > >> >> > > refer > >> >> > > > > this Beatriz Gonçalves de Leam de Chamorra. They would have > been > >> >> as > >> >> > > > > stupefied as I am. Did this document eluded them? I don't > >> believe > >> >> > that > >> >> > > > > having seen it they would discard it,. They were too > >> knowledgeable > >> >> to > >> >> > > do > >> >> > > > > it. > >> >> > > > > Besides it has a promising discovery adventure appended to > it. > >> So > >> >> I > >> >> > > have > >> >> > > > to > >> >> > > > > concede that this document that I got pretty easily escaped > >> their > >> >> > > > > attention, > >> >> > > > > or was stuck in an old pile behind a desk or something at > their > >> >> time. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Of course this interests half Madeira, since half Madeira > >> descends > >> >> > from > >> >> > > > the > >> >> > > > > Rodrigues de Gouveia. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Cheers, > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Miguel > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > ------------------------------- > >> >> > > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> > > > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > >> >> without > >> >> > > the > >> >> > > > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > ------------------------------- > >> >> > > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> > > > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > >> >> without > >> >> > > the > >> >> > > > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > ------------------------------- > >> >> > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> > > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > >> >> without > >> >> > the > >> >> > > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > ------------------------------- > >> >> > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> > > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > >> >> without > >> >> > the > >> >> > > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------- > >> >> > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > >> without > >> >> the > >> >> > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------- > >> >> > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > >> without > >> >> the > >> >> > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > ------------------------------- > >> >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without > >> >> the > >> >> > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > ------------------------------- > >> >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without > >> >> the > >> >> > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> ------------------------------- > >> >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > >> the > >> >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ------------------------------- > >> >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > >> the > >> >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >