Skip to content
Coat of Arms of GaliciaGalicia

Regional families

Puga – Alvarez de Belmonte – Noboa – Enríquez

Transcribed from the three supplied Geni images. Fernando Enríquez and Leonor de Noboa Ambia recur within this source tree and are drawn as shared ancestors. The older Enríquez branch reaches Alonso Enríquez de Castilla, Infante Fadrique Alfonso and Paloma, displayed as Paloma ibn Yahya following the family correction naming Gedaliah ibn Yahya as her father. The parent links transcribed from Geni and the converso association retain candidate status. A separate royal continuation from Fadrique follows Salazar y Acha (RAH/BOE, 2021), with its own citations; it does not verify the Galician-to-royal descent. Shared royal ancestors are represented once. The unnamed N.N. mother is preserved, blank boxes are omitted, and truncated titles are not expanded. This regional tree has no assigned connection to our personal Álvarez pedigree. The earlier Puga ancestry is extended from the supplied 2011 compilation through the Vasco–María couple as a candidate cross-source match; the traditional first generations are not independently established. The corrected Belmonte generations and Antonia’s Puga parentage follow Rudesindus (2021). Inés’s descent from the earliest couple is probable. Beatriz’s parents and the identity of Pedro el Mozo with the Santafé treasurer remain unverified. The Colombian study independently names the treasurer’s Belmonte parents. Two Antonias are kept distinct. Royal ancestry and Portuguese continuation retain their source qualifications; this network does not establish converso ancestry or a connection to the personal family.

Explore
Interpretive illustration

Regional research is separate from our own family tree. A common surname, trade or place does not establish kinship or religious status.

Candidate

Family reconstruction

Transcribed from the three supplied Geni images. Fernando Enríquez and Leonor de Noboa Ambia recur within this source tree and are drawn as shared ancestors. The older Enríquez branch reaches Alonso Enríquez de Castilla, Infante Fadrique Alfonso and Paloma, displayed as Paloma ibn Yahya following the family correction naming Gedaliah ibn Yahya as her father. The parent links transcribed from Geni and the converso association retain candidate status. A separate royal continuation from Fadrique follows Salazar y Acha (RAH/BOE, 2021), with its own citations; it does not verify the Galician-to-royal descent. Shared royal ancestors are represented once. The unnamed N.N. mother is preserved, blank boxes are omitted, and truncated titles are not expanded. This regional tree has no assigned connection to our personal Álvarez pedigree. The earlier Puga ancestry is extended from the supplied 2011 compilation through the Vasco–María couple as a candidate cross-source match; the traditional first generations are not independently established. The corrected Belmonte generations and Antonia’s Puga parentage follow Rudesindus (2021). Inés’s descent from the earliest couple is probable. Beatriz’s parents and the identity of Pedro el Mozo with the Santafé treasurer remain unverified. The Colombian study independently names the treasurer’s Belmonte parents. Two Antonias are kept distinct. Royal ancestry and Portuguese continuation retain their source qualifications; this network does not establish converso ancestry or a connection to the personal family.

Elvira GonzálezResearch lead · Geni family tree 6000000175860729822 · three family-supplied images · 22 October 2026
Record →
Alonso EnríquezResearch lead · Geni family tree 6000000175860729822 · three family-supplied images · 22 October 2026
Record →
N.N.Unnamed source placeholderResearch lead · Geni family tree 6000000175860729822 · three family-supplied images · 22 October 2026
Record →
Paloma ibn YahyaResearch lead · Geni family tree 6000000175860729822 · three family-supplied images · 22 October 2026
Record →
Vasco de PugaResearch lead · Geni family tree 6000000175860729822 · three family-supplied images · 22 October 2026
Record →
Lorenzo de TemesResearch lead · Geni family tree 6000000175860729822 · three family-supplied images · 22 October 2026
Record →
Mencia López de FigueroaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Lope Vázquez de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Ana de SotomayorResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Pedro Vázquez de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
María Pérez de NovoaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
María Yáñez de UlloaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Pedro Yáñez de UlloaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Roi Vázquez EnríquezResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Diego de OcaResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Juana de CastroResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Margarita Álvarez SoutomaiorResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Ignacio da RochaResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Ana de Troncoso y SotomayorResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Ana SarmientoResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Inés Álvarez SoutomaiorResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Alonso de GrajedaResearch lead · Genealogical Reconstruction: Álvarez de Belmonte – Puga – Enríquez de Novoa · supplied 24 October 2026
Record →
Gonzalo de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Teresa de NovoaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Gonzalo Rodríguez SoteloResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Mencia López MosqueraResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Galor MosqueraResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Ana DocampoResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Pedro Vázquez de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Violante Enríquez de NovoaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Antonio de Puga y NovoaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Juan de Puga y NovoaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
María Pérez de BóvedaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Domingo PérezResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Ana BóvedaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Juana de Puga y BóvedaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Clemente de Cao CordidoResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Jacinto de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Juana Álvarez AraújoResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Gregorio Salgado de GuntínResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Mendo de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Enrique de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Beatriz de FeijooResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Diego FeijooResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Mencia López de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Nuño González de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Pedro Vázquez de PugaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Inés Taboada BaamondeResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Antonio de Puga FeijooResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Úrsula de UlloaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Felipe de Puga y UlloaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Ana María de Puga y UlloaResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Bernardino Feijoo FajardoResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Guiomar Lorenzo de TemesResearch lead · “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026
Record →
Alonso Novoa EspinosaResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Rodrigo Díaz de CadórnigaResearch lead · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →
Gonzalo Rodríguez SouteloMentioned in the source · Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328
Record →

Claims & citations

Disputed

The corrected tree follows Rudesindus (2021), p. 253: Inés Pérez de Belmonte and Alfonso de Saa are parents of Pedro el Joven. The older Geni links directly to Pedro el Viejo and Elvira González omit this generation and are retained only as superseded source readings. The study qualifies Inés’s own descent from the older couple as probable.

Disputed

The corrected tree follows Rudesindus (2021), p. 253: Inés Pérez de Belmonte and Alfonso de Saa are parents of Pedro el Joven. The older Geni links directly to Pedro el Viejo and Elvira González omit this generation and are retained only as superseded source readings. The study qualifies Inés’s own descent from the older couple as probable.

Disputed

His father is disputed: Salazar y Acha (2021), p. 336, assigns him to admiral Alonso; Rudesindus (2021), p. 257, leaves his father unnamed and calls him a grandson of infante Enrique. The displayed Alonso link remains contested. Rudesindus p. 263 calls Leonor’s husband Alfonso once, but its quoted will names Fernando. Fernando died before 15 April 1453.

Record claim

Son of Alfonso XI and Leonor de Guzmán. Salazar y Acha (p. 330) gives 13 January 1332 and 29 May 1358; Mitre and González Crespo (p. 785) give 1334–1358. Birth is therefore shown as 1332 / 1334. The parents are added from the scholarly genealogy, not inferred from the Geni image.

Unresolved reading

She is displayed as Paloma ibn Yahya following the family correction. Salazar y Acha (p. 331, note 2883) discusses the Paloma tradition but says her name is unknown. That does not establish the full surname or parentage. The family identifies her father as Gedaliah ibn Yahya; this parentage remains a family attribution.

Candidate

The source gives Pedro Álvarez de Belmonte el Viejo as a parent of Inés Pérez de Belmonte. The study presents Inés as the probable daughter of Pedro el Viejo and Elvira González (p. 253). This qualified link stays candidate; her marriage to Alfonso de Saa and their son Pedro el Joven are stated in the published genealogy.

Candidate

The source gives Elvira González as a parent of Inés Pérez de Belmonte. The study presents Inés as the probable daughter of Pedro el Viejo and Elvira González (p. 253). This qualified link stays candidate; her marriage to Alfonso de Saa and their son Pedro el Joven are stated in the published genealogy.

Published genealogy

The source gives Pero Vázquez de Puga as a parent of Antonia de Novoa.

Published genealogy

The source gives Violante Enríquez de Nóboa as a parent of Antonia de Novoa.

Published genealogy

The source reports the marriage of Antonia de Novoa and Rodrigo Díaz de Cadórniga. Rudesindus (2021), p. 263, names this Antonia as daughter of Enrique de Novoa and Violante Mosquera and wife of Rodrigo Díaz de Cadórniga. She is distinct from their granddaughter Antonia, wife of Fernando Álvarez Belmonte. The proposed 1539 wedding date is not assigned: that reference may concern another Antonia in the extended family.

Published genealogy

The source reports the marriage of Fernando Álvarez de Belmonte and Antonia de Novoa.

Published genealogy

The source reports the marriage of Petronila Novoa Belmonte and Francisco Soutelo.

Candidate

The source reports the marriage of Fernando de Soutomaior Enríquez and Juana de Castro. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source gives Fernando de Soutomaior Enríquez as a parent of Margarita Álvarez Soutomaior. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source reports the marriage of Margarita Álvarez Soutomaior and Ignacio da Rocha. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source gives Ignacio da Rocha as a parent of Fernando Álvarez de Soutomaior y Enríquez. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source gives Margarita Álvarez Soutomaior as a parent of Fernando Álvarez de Soutomaior y Enríquez. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source reports the marriage of Fernando Álvarez de Soutomaior y Enríquez and Ana de Troncoso y Sotomayor. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source reports the marriage of Fernando Álvarez de Soutomaior y Enríquez and Ana Sarmiento. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source gives Fernando Álvarez de Soutomaior y Enríquez as a parent of Margarita Álvarez Soutomaior Troncoso. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source gives Ana de Troncoso y Sotomayor as a parent of Margarita Álvarez Soutomaior Troncoso. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source gives Fernando Álvarez de Soutomaior y Enríquez as a parent of Inés Álvarez Soutomaior. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Candidate

The source gives Ana de Troncoso y Sotomayor as a parent of Inés Álvarez Soutomaior. Portuguese continuation reported by the study, whose authors explicitly say that this genealogy was not fully verified. These links remain candidates.

Published genealogy

The source reports the marriage of Fernando Enríquez and Leonor de Noboa Ambia.

Published genealogy

The source gives Juan López Delgado de Mera as a parent of Sebastiana López de Mera. BHA 878 (2024), p. 194, names Sebastiana’s parents as Juan López Delgado and Mariana de Grajeda. The addition “de Mera” in her father’s displayed name comes from the supplied brief and is not confirmed by the article. This is published genealogical support; the underlying original records were not inspected.

Published genealogy

The source gives Mariana de Grajeda as a parent of Sebastiana López de Mera. BHA 878 (2024), p. 194, names Sebastiana’s parents as Juan López Delgado and Mariana de Grajeda. The addition “de Mera” in her father’s displayed name comes from the supplied brief and is not confirmed by the article. This is published genealogical support; the underlying original records were not inspected.

Disputed

Francisco’s marriage to Petronila is reported in the Belmonte and Soutelo household accounts. The supplied reconstruction had death about 1612; the indexed Soutelo account instead gives death between 1594 and 1600. The conflicting dates remain unresolved and no single death date is displayed.

Candidate

The supplied brief links a forum discussion of a dowry granted by Fernando on 5 February 1524 for his sister Iseo’s marriage to Pedro Díaz de Cadórniga, identifying Fernando as legitimate son and heir of Pedro Álvarez de Belmonte and Beatriz Enríquez. The original deed and archival locator have not been verified. This is retained as a research lead alongside the published succession.

Disputed

Salazar y Acha (2021), p. 336, supports Fernando Enríquez’s marriage to Leonor de Novoa before 1435 and places him among the admiral Alonso Enríquez’s children. Rudesindus (2021), p. 257, instead gives an unnamed father and descent from infante Enrique. The marriage is supported, but these upstream ancestries conflict. Neither establishes the entire Geni royal or converso descent.

Published genealogy

Rudesindus (2021), pp. 244 and 253, names Antonia de Novoa as the daughter of Pedro Vázquez de Puga and Violante Enríquez and wife of Fernán/Fernando Álvarez Belmonte. This supports the Puga–Belmonte link as published genealogy. Antonia Enríquez de Novoa is the name used in the Colombian account. She is distinct from the Antonia, daughter of Enrique de Novoa and Violante Mosquera, who married Rodrigo Díaz de Cadórniga (p. 263).

Disputed

Gonzalo’s death year conflicts: the 2011 Puga compilation gives 1512; Rudesindus (2021), p. 242, gives 1514 and identifies 1512 as the chapel foundation date. No single death year is displayed. Cross-source identity with the compilation occurrence remains a candidate.

Published genealogy

Quintero Guzmán (BHA 878, 2024, p. 194) names Hernando Álvarez de Belmonte and second wife Antonia Enríquez de Novoa as his parents, and Sebastiana de Mera as his wife. Treasury service was 1590–1607 and 1618–1629, with a suspension between. BHA 700 (1973), p. 224, reports death on 3 July 1632 and marriage in 1584; the commercial compilation gives 1594. The wedding year and identification with Pedro Álvarez el Mozo remain unresolved. The c. 1545 birth year is only a Geni estimate.

Disputed

Quintero Guzmán gives conflicting parentage for Isabel, wife of Ambrosio Gómez de la Asprilla. BHA 878 (2024), pp. 193–194, names Fernando Enríquez de Novoa and Francisca de Guzmán; BHA 700 (1973), pp. 223–224, instead names Pedro Henríquez de Novoa and María Quadrado Solanilla. The commercial genealogy uses Francisca de Ponce de León. These parentage and name differences remain unresolved; the existing source claims are retained without merging further people.

Disputed

The supplied outline makes Leonor a daughter of Juan Fernández de Luaces and Elvira González. The existing tree instead makes Juan her spouse and gives Alonso Enríquez and María Enríquez Núñez das Seijas as her parents; Elvira is paired with Pedro Álvarez. The conflicting outline is recorded as disputed, without replacing those people or edges.

Disputed

The corrected tree follows Rudesindus (2021), p. 253: Inés Pérez de Belmonte and Alfonso de Saa are parents of Pedro el Joven. The older Geni links directly to Pedro el Viejo and Elvira González omit this generation and are retained only as superseded source readings. The study qualifies Inés’s own descent from the older couple as probable.

Published genealogy

Teresa de Novoa’s second marriage was to Gonzalo de Puga.

Published genealogy

Teresa de Novoa’s first marriage was to Gonzalo Rodríguez Soutelo / Sotelo.

Hypothesis

The early Maceda succession is collateral: Leonor Enríquez de Castro, daughter of Pedro Enríquez de Castilla, married an earlier Juan Pérez de Novoa (testament 1406). Maceda passed to Juan’s brother Pedro Yáñez de Novoa. The study qualifies this early genealogy; succession alone establishes no descent from Leonor de Castro to Teresa de Novoa.

Record

Geni genealogy · Puga, Belmonte, Noboa and Enríquez

Geni family tree 6000000175860729822 · three family-supplied images · 22 October 2026

Three family-supplied Geni pedigree images, reviewed on 22 October 2026, including the expanded Enríquez and Puga branches. The online viewer required a security check and was not inspected beyond the supplied images. Parent links are candidate genealogy claims; blank boxes and hidden branches are not reconstructed.

Record

Royal genealogy · Salazar y Acha (2021)

Jaime de Salazar y Acha, Las dinastías reales de España en la Edad Media, RAH/BOE, Madrid, 2021, ISBN 978-84-340-2781-7

Jaime de Salazar y Acha, Las dinastías reales de España en la Edad Media, RAH/BOE, 2021. Relevant genealogies and footnotes were reviewed in chapters VII, X and XI. This supports the added royal ancestry from Fadrique; it does not independently verify the supplied Geni links back from the Galician family. Leonor’s mother is not established. Paloma’s full identity is not established by this book.

Record

Fadrique and his descendants · Mitre and González Crespo (2016)

Emilio Mitre Fernández & Esther González Crespo, El maestre D. Fadrique y su descendencia en la formación de la nobleza trastamarista, Hidalguía 373 (2016), pp. 779–808; birth-year comparison at p. 785

Emilio Mitre Fernández and Esther González Crespo, Hidalguía 373 (2016), pp. 779–808. Page 785 lists Fadrique as 1334–1358; Salazar y Acha gives 1332–1358. The conflicting birth years are retained rather than selecting one as certain.

Record

Puga lineages · genealogy compilation (2011)

“Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 noviembre 2011 · family-supplied text, reviewed 23 October 2026

Family-supplied text matched to “Linajes y genealogía de Puga”, Puga: un apellido toponímico, 23 November 2011. The compilation cites a general bibliography, including Crespo Pozo and Portuguese nobiliaries, without locators for individual relationships. Those underlying records were not independently reviewed for this import. All imported relationships are candidate genealogy; conflicting accounts, traditional origins and incomplete grandparent links are qualified.

Record

New Granada genealogy · Quintero Guzmán (2024)

Miguel Wenceslao Quintero Guzmán, “La ascendencia de Camilo Torres y Francisco José de Caldas”, Boletín de Historia y Antigüedades CXI, 878 (2024), pp. 181–215

Boletín de Historia y Antigüedades 878 (2024), pp. 181–215; relevant pp. 193–194 and notes 51–57 inspected. Supports the treasurer’s parents, marriage and interrupted service. Cites Flórez de Ocáriz, Libro Segundo, p. 98, and Sebastiana’s will, AGN, Colonia, Notaría Primera de Santafé, 1652, f. 527r. These underlying originals were not inspected; the article does not establish the Pedro el Mozo alias.

Record

Gómez de la Asprilla · Quintero Guzmán (1973)

Miguel Wenceslao Quintero Guzmán, “Gómez de la Asprilla”, Boletín de Historia y Antigüedades LX, 700 (1973), pp. 223–231

Boletín de Historia y Antigüedades 700 (1973), pp. 223–231, especially p. 224. Reports Pedro’s Belmonte parents, death on 3 July 1632 and marriage in 1584. The commercial genealogy gives 1594. Downstream Isabel parentage differs between accounts and is not reconciled by this review.

Record

Belmonte–Puga–Novoa · supplied research brief (2026)

Genealogical Reconstruction: Álvarez de Belmonte – Puga – Enríquez de Novoa · supplied 24 October 2026

User-supplied reconstruction brief reviewed on 24 October 2026. It is a research guide, not an original record. Claims supported only by this brief remain candidates or unresolved readings.

Record

Belmonte succession · Pérez Formoso & Leza Tello (2021)

Pilar Pérez Formoso & Prudencio Leza Tello, “Apuntes para la historia del convento y comunidad de san Francisco de Ourense (II)”, Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328

Published study: Rudesindus 14 (2021), pp. 225–328. Indexed excerpts of the Soutelo/Xocín household and pp. 242, 244, 253–255, 257, 263 and 271 were inspected; the PDF and cited original deeds were not fully inspected. The authors explicitly qualify the Portuguese continuation as not fully verified. A published transcription is not independent inspection of an original deed.

Record

Enríquez de Novoa · published genealogy

Heráldica de Apellidos · Enríquez de Novoa · “Los que pasaron al Nuevo Reino de Granada”

Commercial heraldic/genealogical website, section “Los que pasaron al Nuevo Reino de Granada”, inspected on 24 October 2026. It cites Restrepo Sáenz–Rivas, Genealogía de Santafé de Bogotá, manuscript no. 151-bis. That manuscript was not inspected. The page supports Pedro’s family and offices, not Sebastiana’s proposed Mera–Grajeda ancestry.

Record

1524 dowry · genealogy forum reference

Foros Xenealoxía · topic 5576, start=100 · 1524 dowry reference supplied by the family

Forum reference supplied in the research brief: the reported deed of 5 February 1524 granted by Fernando for his sister Iseo’s marriage to Pedro Díaz de Cadórniga. The original deed and its archival location remain to be established. This forum reference does not turn the relationship into primary documentary proof.

Record

Paloma’s father · family correction

Paloma · Gedaliah ibn Yahya · 2026-10-25

The family identifies Gedaliah ibn Yahya as Paloma’s father. This supplied attribution is not independently established by the cited scholarly genealogy. No mother, life dates or earlier ancestors are supplied.

Record

Geneall · Fernando Enríquez of Allariz and Celanova

Geneall · Fernando Enríquez, señor de Allariz y Celanova · 1193693

Online genealogy, profile 1193693, reviewed 26 October 2026. It assigns Fernando to Alfonso Enríquez and an unidentified mother and reports Margarita Núñez das Seijas and Leonor de Novoa as wives. Its individual claims remain candidates; the conflicting scholarly paternal accounts are retained.

Record

Geneall · Alonso Enríquez, María das Seijas’s husband

Geneall · Alonso Enríquez · 1307702

Public profile inspected in the browser on 26 October 2026. Names his wife and daughter but displays no parents. Detailed ancestry requires Geneall Plus and was not accessed. This online genealogy is not documentary proof.