Sancho LLERENA Aguilar

NOW PARTLY PRIMARY. The Uruguayan census records him at Calle San Juan, Montevideo, aged 45, birthplace "ANDALUZIA", with MARIA FERNANDEZ on the line below - image opened and read. Six further indexed records name the same wife and the same children while spelling him LLERENA, LERENA, SANCIO LLERENA, D. SANCHO LERENA and LORENA. So the alternation is in the RECORDS, not in a tree. That they are all one man is still an inference, and Cordoba specifically still rests on the tree alone. ORIGINALLY RECORDED AS SECONDARY. The founder of the Montevideo Lerenas on the tree's account: a soldier from Cordoba who married Maria Josefa Fernandez Tresguerras at Canelones, 8 January 1791. His name is spelled BOTH Lerena and Llerena across forty years of Uruguayan registers, and once - in 1828 - "Sancho de Llerena". The acts have NOT been opened here. HE IS NOW ON AN ACT, 13 September 2026, and no longer only on an index and a published tree. Act 585 of 7 October 1850 names the paternal grandparents of Alberto Octavio Lerena as "D. SANCHO y Dona MARIA FERNANDEZ" - so Sancho really is the father of Don Luis Lerena, and the descent this archive marked SECONDARY is upgraded. A DISCREPANCY RECORDED AGAINST IT: two 1846 acts for other children of the same couple give the paternal grandfather as FRANCISCO, not Sancho. Those 1846 entries are LATER TRANSCRIPTS copied out of a legajo ("asi consta del Legajo conservado en este Archivo, mandado trasladar por el Sr. Obispo"), while the 1850 act is a contemporaneous parish entry - so the copy loses to the original. Everything else in both sets agrees. AND A THIRD ACT NAMES HIM, 14 September 2026 - the earliest yet. His son's marriage of 3 March 1842 gives the groom as "hijo legitimo de D. SANCHO y Dona Maria Fernandez". Two acts of 1842 and 1850 now say Sancho against two 1846 entries reading Francisco, and the 1846 pair say of themselves that they are later transcripts from a legajo. AND A FOURTH RECORD, THE EARLIEST OF ALL: his son's own marriage petition of 3 September 1836, in Luis's hand and over Luis's signature - "hijo legitimo de D. SANCHO LERENA y de Dona Maria Fernandez". Four records now name him, across 1836, 1842 and 1850. The doubt raised on 13 September by two 1846 transcripts reading "Francisco" is closed: they are copies, and they are outnumbered by originals. AND TWO MORE RECORDS, 14 September 2026, neither of them about his son Luis. (1) He is named maternal grandfather - "SANCHO LLERENA y MARIA FERNANDEZ" - in the Cordon baptism of 13 December 1831, at which the godfather was DON FRUCTUOSO RIVERA, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC, with his wife Dona Bernardina Fragoso. (2) He appears in person as a sworn witness in a marriage investigation at Canelones: "presento por testigo en esta Vicaria a SANCHO LLERENA, a quien se le recivio juramento". Five records now name him. AND THEN THE QUESTION REOPENED, the same afternoon. The Catedral baptism of Justa Pastora's SECOND child, October 1833 - an ORIGINAL act, not a transcript - names her parents "Maternos: FRANCISCO LERINA y Maria Fernandez". So the Sancho/Francisco alternation is not simply copies against originals, which is what this archive argued an hour earlier and has now withdrawn. The one thing constant in every record is the wife, MARIA FERNANDEZ. A double forename - Sancho Francisco - would explain it all without anybody being wrong, and is the leading reading. See data/sancho-or-francisco.tsv; his own marriage act would settle it and has never been opened. AND THE "AGUILAR" IN HIS NAME HERE IS UNATTESTED. None of the eight records now assembled gives him a matronymic; a full-text search for "Llerena y Aguilar" returns thirty hits and every one is QUITO, ECUADOR - a different family. Aguilar comes from the FamilySearch Tree and from nowhere this archive has read. Kept, because the tree may rest on an act nobody here has opened, but marked. The forename is contested, the matronymic unsupported, and MARIA FERNANDEZ is the only part of this man's identity every record agrees on. AND HE IS NOW ATTESTED IN 1804, twenty-seven years earlier than anything this archive held two days ago. At Canelones on 15 May 1804 his daughter DOMINGA JOSEFA is baptised "hija legitima de SANCHO LLERENA y de MARIA FERNANDEZ"; in the confirmation list of the same year he stands godfather to "Jose, ESCLAVO DE MANUEL LOPEZ"; and in the marriage-investigation files he gives evidence under oath. Father, godfather and sworn witness, in one town, in one decade - and every one of those acts calls him SANCHO. The machine transcript renders him SANCIO on the baptism, a sixth spelling for this family. AND THEN BACK ANOTHER FIFTEEN YEARS, on 14 September 2026: HE IS IN MONTEVIDEO IN 1789. At the Iglesia Matriz on 30 June 1789 the godparents of Juana, daughter of "NICOLAS BENTENO, INDIO NATURAL DE LA CIUDAD DEL TUCUMAN, y de Leonarda Correa de Buenos Ayres", are "SANCHO LLERENA y Juliana Josefa Cornejo". He is about twenty-two, unmarried, and in Montevideo two years before the marriage his tree places at Canelones in 1791. And it is the second time this archive has found him sponsoring at the margins of colonial society: in 1804 he stood godfather to an ENSLAVED MAN, and here to the daughter of an indigenous man from Tucuman. Twice, fifteen years apart. THE TALLY IS ALSO REDONE, AND THE ARCHIVE HAD BEEN COUNTING IT WRONG. Fourteen records now name him: ten SANCHO, four FRANCISCO. But THREE OF THE FOUR FRANCISCOS ARE THE SAME PAGE - La Mauricia, 7 January 1846, one clerk writing three acts on one morning out of one legajo. They are one witness, not three. The Sanchos come from nine separate occasions across sixty-one years, in four parishes and two towns, and twice with the man himself present. So the evidence is not ten to four. It is nine independent occasions against two, and both of the two describe him at second hand by clerks who never met him. A DOUBLE FORENAME REMAINS THE LEADING READING and explains everything without anyone being wrong - but this archive can no longer call the question evenly balanced. AND HIS WIFE'S FULL NAME IS NOW ON AN ACT: her daughter's marriage of 3 November 1830 calls her "MARIA FERNANDEZ TRESGUERRAS". This archive carried that matronymic from a PUBLISHED TREE and marked it secondary; the tree was right, about something no index gives. Which is a point in favour of that same tree's other unverified claim - that they married at CANELONES on 8 JANUARY 1791. That act has still never been opened. And 'AGUILAR' is STILL unattested across all fourteen records. AND ON 14 SEPTEMBER 2026, GENEANET SUPPLIES THE ONE THING THIS ROW HAS BEEN CALLING UNATTESTED ALL DAY. Two Spanish archive indexes - the Index des mariages catholique de Grenade and Spain, Marriages 1565-1950 - carry a marriage of SANCHO LERENA y ARMENTA to ANA MARIA DE AGUILAR, in the DIOCESE OF GRANADA, between 1725 and 1775. A son of that couple would be styled LERENA y AGUILAR - which is exactly the name the trees give this man. So the matronymic is not a tree's invention but a real Spanish naming rule, and it points at a GRANDMOTHER. NOT ADOPTED: the index has been read and the image has not, the date range is a fifty-year span, and no record yet joins that couple to a son born in 1767. But it turns an unattested word into a testable claim in a named diocese, and it is the first thing this archive has ever had that could document this family in SPAIN. GRANADA also sits against the trees' CORDOBA - one of them, ckurti, says ZUHEROS, CORDOBA - while the census says only ANDALUZIA, which both satisfy. AND FOUR TREES GIVE HIM A DEATH IN 1832, where this archive has no death date at all; if true, his son's marriage petition of 1836 names a dead man, which is ordinary. Tree-only, and recorded as a thing to test against Montevideo burials. AND ON 14 SEPTEMBER 2026 THE GRANADA ACT ITSELF WAS FOUND - BUT READ THE NEXT SENTENCE BEFORE CREDITING THIS ROW WITH IT. The birthplaces below belong to a man in SPAIN in 1754, NOT to the Sancho of this row, and nothing yet joins the two. This archive very nearly wrote the Spanish Cordoba into the Uruguayan Sancho's birthplace field on the strength of it; the field above still says CORDOBA COMES ONLY FROM A TREE, and that is still true of THIS man. FamilySearch ark 1:1:C9WG-BGW2 indexes the marriage of SANCHO DE LERENA Y ARMENTA to ANA MARIA DE AGUILAR at SANTA ANA, GRANADA on 17 NOVEMBER 1754 - the fifty-year span reduced to a day - and it gives the groom's BIRTHPLACE AS CORDOBA and his parents as SANCHO DE LERENA Y VELASCO and MARIA ANTONIA DE ARMENTA Y GUEBARA , with the bride the daughter of FRANCISCO DE AGUILAR and BEATRIS FRANCO of La Malaha. That resolves a tension in the SPANISH record - the Geneanet trees said CORDOBA and the marriage index said GRANADA, and both were right, because he was born at one and married at the other. It does NOT reach across the Atlantic. The Uruguayan census's "ANDALUZIA" for the man in this row remains the only birthplace evidence this archive has for HIM, and it is compatible with Cordoba, Granada and much else besides. The image is marked IMAGE UNAVAILABLE and has NOT been opened. AND THE COMPOUND IS NO LONGER A TREE'S HABIT. A Madrid notarial act of 27 March 1790 (ark 3:1:3Q9M-CS2C-N7RV) is signed, in the signature position between the witnesses and the notary, "JUAN DE LERENA Y AGUILAR" - one man, that compound, in the right family and generation, in a Madrid where Sancho de Lerena y Armenta was a vecino from 1766 to 1808. BUT NOT ONE RECORD JOINS ANY OF THEM TO THIS MAN. A controlled search for children of that couple in Spain returned a genuine null (control: 12 results), and the exact-phrase search for "Sancho de Lerena y Aguilar" returned an UNCONTROLLED "(0)" immediately before FamilySearch blocked the session - which is not evidence and is not recorded as a null. So "Aguilar" stays exactly where it was: a strong lead with a Spanish family behind it now instead of nothing, and still unattested in all fourteen Uruguayan records. The place to look for a 1767 baptism is MADRID, not Granada - the earlier errand said "the same diocese" and was written before the Madrid residence was known. See data/1754-granada-act.tsv. AND THEN, THE SAME DAY, THE GRANADA READING WAS WITHDRAWN - BY THE VERY TREE THAT SUPPLIES "AGUILAR". The jfina Geneanet tree, one of the four this archive cites for the form "Lerena y Aguilar", gives this man's parents as FELIX LERENA and ROSALIA AGUILAR, born Cordoba about 1767, citing APOLANT, "Operativo Patagonia" (Montevideo 1970), FICHA 355. So AGUILAR is his MOTHER'S SURNAME - ordinary Spanish naming - and not a grandmother from Granada. The morning's inference, that the compound must descend from the 1754 Granada couple, was a naming rule applied to a name whose actual owner is recorded elsewhere; and the controlled null against that couple is explained rather than puzzling. The Spanish search that matters now is FELIX LERENA and ROSALIA AGUILAR at CORDOBA, which is not the search that was run. AND THE MARRIAGE DATE FINALLY HAS A REAL SOURCE WHILE THE PLACE LOSES ITS ONE: 8 January 1791 comes from Apolant ficha 355, a named published work; "Canelones" appears nowhere in it - the note's "Concejo de Morcin, Asturias" is the BRIDE'S birthplace, she being JOSEFA FERNANDEZ TRESGUERRAS b.1778 at Morcin, an ASTURIAN of the Operativo Patagonia convoy, daughter of RODRIGO FERNANDEZ TRESGUERRAS and ROSA FERNANDEZ. Canelones remains the strong inference because the 1812 padron lists all six children as "naturales del Canelon", the eldest 21. THE 1812 PADRON ALSO HOLDS WHAT THIS ROW DID NOT: calle San Juan No 60, Sancho "andaluz" 45, Maria Fernandez 36, children Juan Agustin 21, Pedro Antonio 19, Agustina 17, Fidel 12, Justa 10 and DOMINGA 7 - all "naturales del Canelon" - his father-in-law RODRIGO FERNANDEZ, 63, asturiano, living in the house, and FOUR ENSLAVED PEOPLE (AGN, Fondo ex AGA, L 251). See data/apolant-ficha-355.tsv. AND ON 15 SEPTEMBER 2026 HIS PARENTS ARRIVED ON AN ACT, WHICH CLOSES THE LAST WEAK JOINT IN THIS ROW. At the Iglesia Matriz of Montevideo on 10 February 1811, at the baptism of his son LUIS ESCOLASTICO, the act names him "Don SANCHO LLERENA natural de ANDALUCIA" and his parents "Abuelos paternos FELIZ GERENA y ROSALIA AGUILAR" - GERENA being the machine's G-for-L, a seventh variant for this family. Until that morning FELIX LERENA and ROSALIA AGUILAR rested on ONE un-consulted journal article reported at second hand through one tree, and this row said so. They are now on a parish act written while he was alive and standing at his own son's font. ANDALUCIA IS ALSO NOW ON AN ACT and no longer only on the 1726-1858 census. CORDOBA IS STILL ON NO ACT and remains what the trees say, citing Apolant ficha 355. AND THE TALLY OF HIS SPONSORSHIPS IS WRONG IN THIS ROW AND IS CORRECTED, 15 September 2026. It says he stood godfather at the margins of colonial society "twice, fifteen years apart" - the indigenous man's daughter in 1789 and an enslaved man in 1804. It is at least FOUR times, and three of them on one day. Three further pages of the 1804 Canelones confirmations name him as padrino, including "Joseph Jimenez ESCLAVO DE DON LUIS JIMENEZ. P. Sancho Llerena" - a different enslaved man with a different owner from the Jose, esclavo de Manuel Lopez, already recorded here. The pattern is now too consistent to read as chance. A NEW CHILD IS ALSO ADDED: JUSTA PASTORA, baptised at Canelones on 9 August 1800, born three days earlier - this archive had her only from her 1830 marriage and from the padron's rough age of 10. That act transcribes the mother as 'MARIA RODRIGO', which is not her name in any of the other fourteen records. The most economical reading is that a clerk wrote her father's forename - RODRIGO Fernandez - and that only became visible once the 1811 act named him. The image has not been opened and the discrepancy is left standing. AND ON 15 SEPTEMBER 2026 THREE MORE ACTS ARRIVED, BECAUSE THE NAME WAS FINALLY SEARCHED WITH ONE L. Every full-text sweep here had been run on SANCHO LLERENA. "Sancho LERENA" returns three Canelones baptisms that were not among them. HIS RANK: the 1793 act calls him "el SOLDADO DRAGON Sancho Lerena" - a dragoon, where the census says only soldado. HIS REGIMENT, BY IMPLICATION: that act was performed by "el Capellan del REGIMIENTO DE INFANTERIA DE BUENOS AYRES Don Bartolome Munoz" - the same regiment whose Libros Castrenses of 1781-1814 are filmed as DGS 7713373. His 1791 marriage may well be in those military books, and the reason to look is now documented rather than hopeful. HIS WIFE IS CALLED TERESA: at a Canelones baptism of 27 October 1805 the godparents are "SANCHO LERENA y MARIA TERESA FERNANDEZ de este Pueblo" - the trees give her as Maria Josefa (TERESA) Fernandez Tresguerras and this archive had marked those forenames tree-only. AND THE SPONSORSHIP COUNT RISES AGAIN, to five. READ OFF THE PLATE 21 September 2026, where this row had rested on a MACHINE TRANSCRIPT since 14 September. Film 007713375 image 02410, Iglesia Matriz de Montevideo, the baptism of Luis Escolastico, 10 February 1811 - the only record in this archive that names Sancho's own parents. 'hijo legitimo de D.n SANCHO LLERENA nat.l de ANDALUCIA' - read off the plate, not off a transcript. The double L is the priest's own, in 1811. THE 1833 ACT THAT CALLS HIM FRANCISCO WAS READ OFF THE PLATE, 21 September 2026 - and that is the whole of what this archive gained today on the question. Film 007713376 images 01176-01177: the Catedral baptism of 19 October 1833, for Justa Pastora's son Aurelio Eusebio, gives the maternal grandparents as 'Fran.co Lerenas y M.a Fernandez'. Until today that reading was a MACHINE TRANSCRIPT - the page and data/sancho-or-francisco.tsv both record it as 'FRANCISCO LERINA', machine-read. A human has now read it off the plate, so the single most important FRANCISCO attestation is no longer possibly a machine artefact. THIS ROW SAID SOMETHING ELSE FOR ABOUT AN HOUR AND IT WAS WRONG. It called the Francisco a priest's slip, said 'every other record this archive has read off a plate calls him SANCHO', and put the count at 'one act against five'. All three are false, and the archive's own file and /hypotheses/ already said so: the 1846 La Mauricia acts were READ OFF THE IMAGE by this archive and say FRANCISCO; the count is SIX saying Sancho against THREE saying Francisco; and the readings split ACROSS methods, not along them - the machine read Sancho in 1831 and Francisco in 1833, this archive read Francisco off 1846 and Sancho off 1836, 1842 and 1850. THE ARCHIVE'S POSITION, WHICH THIS ROW NOW MATCHES: a DOUBLE FORENAME - Sancho Francisco or Francisco Sancho - is the reading that requires nobody to be wrong. What is constant across seventy years and both forenames is the wife: MARIA FERNANDEZ, in every single record. WHAT WOULD SETTLE IT is his own marriage act, said by the tree to be Canelones, 8 January 1791, and never opened.