This study presents a genealogical tree issued in 1819 by the princely Divan for members of Şeptelici family, descendants of great boyars from the 17th century. Although the 19th century descendants of this family were not so high in social rank as their predecessors, it was important for them to prove that they descended from members of the princely Divan, to be able to request to be recognized as noblemen in Austria or Russia, which annexed parts of Moldavia at the end of 18th century and at the beginning of the next one. That’s why the genealogical tree is attested by the Austrian and Russian consuls. The rural boyars who requested and paid a nice amount of money to receive the document with all necessary confirmations were descendants of Şeptelici family, who lost their family name and adopted the name of the village they inherited from one of their ancestors. Along with their name, they also lost all the papers that could prove that they were a branch of Şeptelici family. Their claim was supported only by the testimony of their “cousins”, boyars with Şeptelici family name. The princely Divan asked the “professional genealogist” Costandin Leondari, author of the famous genealogical tree on the Balş family provided with arms from 1813, to do the necessary research. Based on the documents he could find in the archives, he compiled a tree with five generations of ancestors, all descending from a 17th century member of the princely Divan, the “hatman” (commander of the army) Vasile Şeptelici. Costandin Leondari noted the documents he used to prove the lineages, at a first glance his effort being very impressive. But, when the actual documents were confronted with his work, some inconsistencies were detected. Some lineages were invented, and the main beneficiary of the fraud was the benevolent “cousin”, who could prove the direct descent from three consecutive members of the princely Divan. The conclusion which draws from the study is that these kind of genealogical documents, issued by the princely Divan, with all sorts of attestations, should not be fully and unconditionally trusted, but rather critically analysed, and the information double-checked with other documents.