AZORES-L Archives

Archiver > AZORES > 2001-08 > 0996699962


From: Doug da Rocha Holmes <>
Subject: Re: [AZORES-L] Re: Cruz surname
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 14:06:02 -0700
References: <200108011300.f71D0KF10459@lists5.rootsweb.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010801151504.70388.qmail@web13307.mail.yahoo.com>


Hi Ruy (Cardoso),

Your findings from your Buarcos database are quite interesting. It brings to mind one village I know where "da Cruz" is also the only surname used by several generations of males.

I do agree with you on every point and am sorry to have been too hasty in explaining why I said it wasn't a real surname. If I had explained the pros and cons so thoroughly as you just did, I think Bethany would have had a better and more clear picture of this name. So she has that from you now.

When I compared Cruz to Silveira, in your own words, you seem to agree Silveira is the name we more traditionally think of as a surname. It has an armorial, for one, and has no religious connotations to muddle up our opinions.

As we both seem to have concluded, when it comes to Portuguese names, you can't make everything black or white. There are so many shades between. Santos surely a surname - ask our friend Ary Santos from Brasil. :-)

But since Santos and Cruz have these religious connotations, at least in origin, and because the women were using names like Conceição, Jesus, etc. at their own whim and fancy, sometimes discarding one for another, we simply are left with little choice but to say they are somewhat less than "normal" surnames (when applied to women) and always questionable when applied to men.

But then if you look at the other side of the coin, you take a name like Furtado which has as its origin "o furtado" (the furtive one) and is a nickname, we surely consider this as a "normal" surname and it has an armorial. So in the end, who is to say that when a name is based on a location or a nickname or saint, etc, that it is any less of a surname than any other name. In their beginnings, all names were applied in order to more clearly separate the people and distinguish them. How they did that was from different sources, but all with the same result. And just because this often happened in the 12th century doesn't mean it can't again happen in the 19th century.

There is a line of people all related to me using the name Gonçalves Leonardo, but some added "Sozinho" to the end of it. Now people in the U.S. have Sozinho as their surname, but this was a nickname begun to be used in the 19th century. There are uncounted examples of this, as you know.

The whole topic of surnames can be such a mess to explain and most "outsiders" are totally baffled. But as has been said by several others, that is all part of the fun we have as Portuguese genealogists, to figure out all the answers when presented with such obstacles.

Cumprimentos,
Doug "o rocha homem"


At 08:15 AM 8/1/2001 , Ruy Cardoso wrote:
>Hi, Doug.
>
>I have a couple of thoughts, hopefully not too
>pedantic, about your reference to a "real" surname and
>also more particularly about the name da Cruz.
>
>First, about "real" surnames: my mother has a first
>cousin whose last name is Fragata and whose children's
>last names are Fragata. Let me give you one short
>line of descent that leads to this cousin, with the
>first name in each line being the child of the couple

>in the preceding line:
>
>Manoel Francisco Branco = Antonia Maria Fragata
>Manoel Francisco Branco = Rosa Maria Martela
>Alexandre Francisco Branco = Maria Rosa Malhoa
>Joao Maria Branco = Lusitana Pereira Eiras
>(Mom's Cousin) Fragata
>
>So can we call my mother's cousin's last name of
>Fragata "real" even though the preceding four
>generations of males used Branco on most of the
>records I have? I expect that cousin Fragata and his
>children feel that it is quite real.
>
>Note also the use of Fragata as the wife's last name
>in the very first line in the descent above (it shows
>up on one record I have; there are others that just
>refer to her as Antonia Maria). Does that change the
>answer about whether Fragata is a real name?
>
>One could even ask the same question about Branco: is
>it a real last name, or is it a mere alcunha? How
>about if it persists for four generations, as in the
>above descent?
>
>The definition of a real name is just not so clear cut
>as all that, and I have personally stopped referring
>to any last name as "real", although convenience of
>course often dictates assigning one name as "the" last
>name in a database when multiple names are used by the
>same person in different records.
>
>Second, about the name "da Cruz": in checking my
>Buarcos baptism data base, I find the name as the last
>name of the father (literally, the last name shown for
>the person on the record) on 143 baptisms. Of those
>143, only 27 (19%) also have another name of the sort
>we usually call a surname preceding the "da Cruz",
>usually Correa but sometimes Simoes or Rodrigues.
>
>Of the other 116, 100 also have a legible name for the
>paternal grandfather. Of those 100, 81 also have a
>last name of "da Cruz" without an accompanying more
>traditional surname; the others have what we might
>more traditionally call last names (Ribeiro or Amaral,
>for instance).
>
>Further, there are at least some instances -- perhaps
>only a couple -- where, say, a Manoel da Cruz and his
>wife show up as paternal grandparents on a baptism
>record naming Antonio da Cruz and his wife as parents,
>and with that same Antonio da Cruz and his wife later
>showing up as paternal grandparents themselves. In
>other words, there are strings of records where the
>name da Cruz looks like a surname for three
>generations rather than just two. To my mind, getting
>passed on this way is a reasonable test of whether a
>surname is "real" or not.
>
>Don't get me wrong; I also have 122 baptisms where the
>father's name has "da Cruz" *followed* by another more
>typical last name or alcunha, and I agree with you
>that many religious names are somehow less real than

>more typical surnames (I'm thinking particularly of
>names like da Encarnacao, da Piedade, or the
>ever-popular de Jesus). But "da Cruz" seems to
>function like a real last name in many cases, sort of
>like "da Silva", and I would put it in a different
>category, at least based on the records I am most
>familiar with. I would probably also put "dos Santos"
>right with "da Cruz".
>
>Finally, there is no question that the names Cruz,
>Santos, da Cruz, and dos Santos function very much as
>surnames here in the US.
>
>Ruy
>
>
>> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:15:55 -0700
>> From: Doug da Rocha Holmes <>
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: [AZORES-L] Cruz surname
>>
>> Dear Bethany,
>>
>> I have a person in my database born about 1700 named
>> Manuel Silveira da Cruz. So I believe there is a
>> good chance you are right about Silveira being what
>> the S. stands for. And if so, you are also right
>> that Silveira is the real surname.
>>
>> Good luck,
>>
>> Doug

This thread: