In my opinion, it is wrong to say that Rochus is the Dutch and German form of Rocco. Yes, Rochus has been used in The Netherlands and Germany for quite a few centuries already (in The Netherlands, the name first appeared in the 16th century), but Rochus is actually a *latinization* of the original Germanic name. A genuine Dutch form of Rocco would be Rook, for example (which is archaic and barely used these days, though) - but not Rochus. Therefore, I personally believe that the entry for Rochus should be modified to say that it is a latinization of the original Germanic name. [noted -ed]