Catherine Baillon
PAL...@aol.com
GEN-MEDIEVA...@rootsweb.com writes:
> Furthermore, I know that several other French Canadian researchers are
> researching some other possible royal gateway ancestors. I have great ho=
> pes
> that within a couple of years there should be several more well documente=
> d
> royal gateway lineages for both Acadian and French Canadian genealogists =
> to
> ponder.
>
> JP
>
> John P. DuLong, Ph.D.
> Acadian and French Canadian Genealogy
> 959 Oxford Road
> Berkley, MI 48072-2011
> (248) 541-2894
>
Sorry folks got excited a pushed the send button too soon so the first
message went blank.
John DuLong I am glad to see you here. I want to thank you and your team for
the Catherine Baillon work. I was thrilled to find your site as I had
Catherine Baillon documented in my French Canadian research. She is a
maternal line that was valued as a Fille de Roi then you presented me with a
Royal Lineage that I never dreamed of. I see you mention that the book is
out so I will be going to the site and placing my order. Can't wait to get
it. I found my French Canadian roots (though a long process because I did
maternal and paternal) easy to research. Quebec has taken such care to
preserve her documents that I can find most anything but what my Pioneer
grandparents ate for breakfast the day they arrived. I also see Denis
Beaugard's name mentioned here. He has done alot to help and make it easy
for all who are looking. A gentleman who never refuses advice and assistance
to all who ask. So here I am in England probably headed back to France only
the bare spots in the registers will make the task much more challenging.
Because of you I smile when people say "don't expect to find any royalty in
your line" because I already have it and now I have a Lancelot Drew in Devon.
Oh where do we go from here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Peggy (Drew) Large
Proudly descended from Jean Hardy of Normandy who found a new home in Quebec
1666.
Janko Pavsic
You have probably another royal connection through French Canadians
(if your Hardy ancestors for the next generation are Pierre Hardy (son
of Jean Hardy and Marie Poiré) and his wife Marie-Charlotte Lefebvre.
Janko Pavsic
Denis Beauregard
écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval:
Janko:
This line thru my de Belleau ancestors is still not proven. We
don't even have a clue as for the high nobility connection. The
Valpergue line is still a dead end except if you have found the
connection.
There are many other possible royal lines yet to be proven. For
example, the Ruette d'Auteuil line thru the Clement de Wuault line
which has some Hangest, Estrée and Aleu spouses.
If talking about a QRD10 <g> (a Quebec Royal Descents 10), we should
focus on the proven lines, even if the sources are not reliable,
when the line is complete to some king. As for a list of families
to search, those works should be listed separately like I did in
my GDO.
Denis
--
0 Denis Beauregard
/\/ Web de généalogie: http://www.genealogie.com (français)
|\ Genealogy Web site: http://www.francogene.com (English)
/ |
oo oo
John P. DuLong
descendants that Janko is discussing. The outline of this connection in his
other posting is certainly intirguing. I look forward to reading his
article.
"Denis Beauregard" <denis....@genealogie.com.invalid> wrote:
> If talking about a QRD10 <g> (a Quebec Royal Descents 10), we should
> focus on the proven lines, even if the sources are not reliable,
> when the line is complete to some king. As for a list of families
> to search, those works should be listed separately like I did in
> my GDO.
I would have to agree with Denis. It seems to me that we should be very
cautious about suggesting royal connections. We have to treat the
connections as a theory until a thorough analysis with supporting
documentation is published. Janko will soon publish on this new connection,
until then, people should wait patiently and not run off to try and fill in
the blanks.
I am confident that in the next year or two there will be a few more
breakthrough royal connections for French Canadians and Acadians. However,
we must also realize that many other purported royal connections will also
fail to be proven over the next few years. And I am afraid that some that
might have been accepted will be rejected after further research.
Perhaps we will only end up with 20 or 30 proven lines, but this will still
be much more manageable than the hundreds that have been claimed for English
Americans and which have been supported by further research or contradicted
by the facts.
The rule of thumb that I have is that it is easy to claim a royal
connection, but it is expensive and time consuming to document the
connection to the extent that it will stand up to scrutiny.
JP
John P. DuLong, Ph.D.
Acadian and French Canadian Genealogy
959 Oxford Road
Berkley, MI 48072-2011
(248) 541-2894
Denis Beauregard
<dul...@habitant.org> écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval:
>I do not know the merits of the case for a royal connection for the Hardy
>descendants that Janko is discussing. The outline of this connection in his
>other posting is certainly intirguing. I look forward to reading his
>article.
Since I descend too from that De Belleau line and I know Janko
for some times. I have a strong feeling that most lines where
you turn around for a while will get nowhere or will wait a
while before being proven.
Let's consider the main Quebec royal lines.
Baillon: 3 lines were found and considered as wrong before a line
with each generation proven was found. I don't know what was
the search method, but as I see it (and I can be wrong), the line
advanced step by step. The Chabaud line is the easy one once
Tourrette was identified (I have photocopies of 2 books with the
Chabaud lines, you have the Anne-Marie de Chabot book, I have
her draft from AD06, etc., this line was waiting to be found).
Billy: this is a good nobility line so it. The whole line is
in Pere Anselme
Levreault de Langis: The first part of the line is in
Beauchet-Filleau and the second in Pere Anselme.
Damours: a lot of small steps
Leneuf: I don't have it near me, but I think once you identified
a possible line to royalty, you concentrated on that family and
advance was fast
Amiot-Longueval: from comments I get, once someone in France
found the first relevant documents, it goes very fast to find
more generations.
Vaudreuil: done very fast (but no descendants here)
Belleau-Breda: done very fast (but no known descendants)
And the Acadian lines would be quite similar: once there is
a known line of the family that is published, advance is fast
(so, one problem is to identify the correct family and a source
complete enough). Otherwise, the problem is to find where to
search. But I see at first glance no case where search was
extensive in one place after the family or the place was identified.
Also, obviously, when you have someone in France doing the search,
and knowing what he/she is doing, a line may grow very fast.
The problem is to know which migrant can be interesting in an
expensive search.
Denis
--
D. Spencer Hines
>connection, but it is expensive and time consuming to document the
>connection to the extent that it will stand up to scrutiny.
>
>JP
Indeed.
And that's why there are battalions of righteous pogues and poguettes
who claim to have them ---- but damned few who can prove them.
Many of the alleged royal connections fail at the point of the alleged
GARD, or on either side, in proximate generations ---- or both.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"Forsan et haec olim meminisse juvabit." Publius Virgilius Maro
(Virgil) [70-19 B.C.] [Aeneid I, 203] Aeneas, seeking to comfort his
men as they contemplate an arduous journey to Italy, reassures them
that, "Someday, perhaps, it will be pleasant to remember all this."
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
Vires et Honor
John P. DuLong
> Let's consider the main Quebec royal lines.
>
> Baillon: 3 lines were found and considered as wrong before a line
> with each generation proven was found. I don't know what was
> the search method, but as I see it (and I can be wrong), the line
> advanced step by step. The Chabaud line is the easy one once
> Tourrette was identified (I have photocopies of 2 books with the
> Chabaud lines, you have the Anne-Marie de Chabot book, I have
> her draft from AD06, etc., this line was waiting to be found).
I am aware of two lines being found and rejected: (1) the lineage proposed
by Père Pacôme and (2) the Bournel de Thiembronne line Jetté proposed in his
_Traité de généalogie_. Now I confess that I am getting more and more
forgetful, but what would be the third rejected line? As for our method, it
was to first review everything published about the known ancestors of
Catherine Baillon and then to look at every possible document in the Cabinet
des titres regarding her ancestors. This worked well for the Le Bouteillier
connection. The Cabinet des titres was less helpful for the
Vintimille-Lascaris line and we had to rely on sources from southern France.
Of course one found document would often lead to another and so on. Yes Mme
Chabot outlined the Vintimille-Lascaris line, but she did not document it in
her book. Did she in her notes?
> Billy: this is a good nobility line so it. The whole line is
> in Pere Anselme
>
> Levreault de Langis: The first part of the line is in
> Beauchet-Filleau and the second in Pere Anselme.
>
> Damours: a lot of small steps
I do not know that much about these lines except what I have seen about the
Billy line in Jetté's book.
> Leneuf: I don't have it near me, but I think once you identified
> a possible line to royalty, you concentrated on that family and
> advance was fast
We (Jetté, Gagné, and I) spent many frustrating years trying to document how
the Canadian Le Neufs fit in with the Le Neufs of Normandie. Eventually, we
gave up on this effort. Meanwhile, we had been working on associated
maternal ancestors and a series of hunches and some significant help from a
researcher (Leportier) in France led to some major breakthroughs. The
Cabinet des titres was not as helpful on the Le Neuf project as it was on
the Baillon project but it was still necessary to go through the dossiers on
the Le Neufs.
> Amiot-Longueval: from comments I get, once someone in France
> found the first relevant documents, it goes very fast to find
> more generations.
I hope this one pans out as I descend from this couple.
> Vaudreuil: done very fast (but no descendants here)
>
> Belleau-Breda: done very fast (but no known descendants)
Not of much interest to us because of the lack of North American
descendants.
> And the Acadian lines would be quite similar: once there is
> a known line of the family that is published, advance is fast
> (so, one problem is to identify the correct family and a source
> complete enough). Otherwise, the problem is to find where to
> search. But I see at first glance no case where search was
> extensive in one place after the family or the place was identified.
> Also, obviously, when you have someone in France doing the search,
> and knowing what he/she is doing, a line may grow very fast.
> The problem is to know which migrant can be interesting in an
> expensive search.
Denis, I think you are right about things moving fast once a lineage is
worked out. However, it can take some time to convert a theory into a well
documented lineage. I have never sat down and calculated how much we spent
on the Baillon project, but I am sure it was over $2,000 USA (I think
perhaps it might had been over $3,000 USA). In addition, the project lasted
over eight years and involved a research team of five genealogists (Jetté,
Gagné, Moreau, Dubé, and DuLong) and the help of many librarians and
archivists.
What I would like to see happen would be an organized project to assess the
research possibilities for all the noble families listed in Gadoury's _La
Noblesse de Nouvelle-France_ (1991) and other known nobles in Acadian,
Québec, and Louisiana she failed to mention. Most of these people were
recently ennobled and had bourgeois roots, but some of them as they moved
socially upward married downwardly mobile spouses. It will be through these
gateway ancestors that more breakthroughs will be made. If each one could
be examined back a few more generations, then we would be in a better
position to know which ones to pursue. Although I desperately want to get
out of the Medieval Genealogy business and back to studying French
Canadians, Acadians, and Métis in the Midwest, I keep thinking that I would
like to try and do this basic research for the DeJordy and Robineau
families, but who has the time? Even if all we had was a clearinghouse to
let us know who is working on what families, what progress they have made,
what roadblocks they have hit, etc., this would be helpful.
Perhaps my estimate of 20 to 30 gateway ancestors for French North America
is too optimistic, but I do think we will end up with more than 10. At
least that is my hope.
Lastly, I would love to see the whole Cabinet des titres microfilmed and
made available through the Family History Library. This collection is
crucial for studying French noble families. Besides checking the standard
published French sources and guides (like Saffroy, Arnaud, Père Anselme,
etc.), it is essential to see what is in the Cabinet des titres. Recently,
I have had the chance to work with the records of the Genealogical Office of
Ireland (the former Ulster King of Arms' records) on microfilm. It is a
great help to be able to go through these records on microfilm and it has
really opened up the project I am working on. Making the Cabinet des titres
records available would also be a great boon to French nobility research.
Just some thoughts,
Denis Beauregard
<dul...@habitant.org> wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:
>"Denis Beauregard" <denis....@genealogie.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Let's consider the main Quebec royal lines.
>>
>> Baillon: 3 lines were found and considered as wrong before a line
>> with each generation proven was found. I don't know what was
>> the search method, but as I see it (and I can be wrong), the line
>> advanced step by step. The Chabaud line is the easy one once
>> Tourrette was identified (I have photocopies of 2 books with the
>> Chabaud lines, you have the Anne-Marie de Chabot book, I have
>> her draft from AD06, etc., this line was waiting to be found).
>
>I am aware of two lines being found and rejected: (1) the lineage proposed
>by Père Pacôme and (2) the Bournel de Thiembronne line Jetté proposed in his
>_Traité de généalogie_. Now I confess that I am getting more and more
>forgetful, but what would be the third rejected line? As for our method, it
Thru the Braque. One of them married a Guillemette de Montmorency
(there is a French king 6 generations above her). One problem is the
difference of social status but a great-nephew or niece married
another de Montmorency. Anyway, that point seems impossible to prove
(there is a note about that in the Braque genealogy in D'Hozier I
think).
This supports my claim. On one hand, trying with no clue leaded
nowhere. On the other hand, working with someone on the field
helped a lot. Like the Longueval case.
I am not sure at all Gaboury is the best reference as a starting
list. Or her list would have to be revised completely. She
focussed only on the nobility living in New France, not on
possible noble ancestry. Since that nobility is for most a set
of militaries who get back to France after 1760, it is not useful.
But I must admit I tried to build my own list with a list of
potential nobles and it is really not obvious to identify the
true nobles and those who tried to look like nobles. At this time,
I have a list of nearly all married migrants to Quebec before 1825
with a known place of origin, still building the list for Acadia
and the West (but I have a full of all marriages in Population des
Forts Francais). I put a flag when someone was possibly a noble
and checked only a few of them.
>recently ennobled and had bourgeois roots, but some of them as they moved
>socially upward married downwardly mobile spouses. It will be through these
>gateway ancestors that more breakthroughs will be made. If each one could
>be examined back a few more generations, then we would be in a better
>position to know which ones to pursue. Although I desperately want to get
>out of the Medieval Genealogy business and back to studying French
>Canadians, Acadians, and Métis in the Midwest, I keep thinking that I would
>like to try and do this basic research for the DeJordy and Robineau
>families, but who has the time? Even if all we had was a clearinghouse to
>let us know who is working on what families, what progress they have made,
>what roadblocks they have hit, etc., this would be helpful.
At this time, I am that clearinghouse... I examined over 200 printed
sources when I wrote my GDO to find what was already found. But the
10,000 pages of notes from Godbout, plus all the published works
should be added to a database to organize all that information. My
problem is I have no more money to continue and will have now to get
back to a full time job (but I will try a last project before that).
>Perhaps my estimate of 20 to 30 gateway ancestors for French North America
>is too optimistic, but I do think we will end up with more than 10. At
>least that is my hope.
>
>Lastly, I would love to see the whole Cabinet des titres microfilmed and
>made available through the Family History Library. This collection is
>crucial for studying French noble families. Besides checking the standard
>published French sources and guides (like Saffroy, Arnaud, Père Anselme,
>etc.), it is essential to see what is in the Cabinet des titres. Recently,
I have a photocopy of families covered by the Cabinet. It is in
Fonds Denis Amiot at the SGCF, so we know at least which families
are there.
>I have had the chance to work with the records of the Genealogical Office of
>Ireland (the former Ulster King of Arms' records) on microfilm. It is a
>great help to be able to go through these records on microfilm and it has
>really opened up the project I am working on. Making the Cabinet des titres
>records available would also be a great boon to French nobility research.
I hope so.
Denis
Gerard Poissonnier
>
> Since I descend too from that De Belleau line and I know Janko
> for some times. I have a strong feeling that most lines where
> you turn around for a while will get nowhere or will wait a
> while before being proven.
>
Larose is it?
> Let's consider the main Quebec royal lines.
>
[snip various possible lines]
> Amiot-Longueval: from comments I get, once someone in France
> found the first relevant documents, it goes very fast to find
> more generations.
>
When you say Amiot-Longueval are you referring to Philippe Amiot dit
Villeneuve
whose mother-in-law was Antoinette de Longval? If so, then where
would I be able to get more information regarding this possible royal
descent?
I also have some questions regarding other Quebec pioneers. What about
the Sieur de La Durantaye Olivier Morel de La Durantaye? I know that
you give a
number of generations of ascendance for him in your DGO, but it appears
as though
the line stays in the minor (?) nobility. Also, has any possible royal
line
been investigated for Francois Duval dit Duponthaut whose father was
Seigneur du Ponthaut Guillaume Duval du Ponthaut? As a seigneur it
would appear he is at least a member of the minor nobility of Bretagne.
Finally, there is Sieur de La Montagne Honore Martel husband of
Marguerite L'Admiraut. Is the Sieur an indication of nobility or just
an honorific?
Finally, I have visited the Fichier Origine site and I have a question.
Since you are the guy who maintains the Fichier Origine I figure you're
the guy to ask. My paternal ancestor is Pierre Boissonniere dit
Leveille
(who has no royal line of ascent that I'm aware of) who was a Soldat in
Les Troupes de La Colonie (what we
today would call the Marines, I think) and was in Quebec by 24 May 1699
at the latest. I have not found him listed in the Fichier Origine. Is
that because you have not located his baptismal document? Or, is it
because it has not yet been sought? I believe that Jette states he was
from Fauch, arondissement d'Albi, Languedoc, France (modern day
Departement de Tarn 81).
BTW, again on the subject of royal descents, Pierre's commanding officer
was the Sieur de Manthet Nicolas
D'Ailleboust de Mantet who, it has been suggested here, does have a
royal line of ascent via the Stuarts of
Scotland.
--Gerard
Denis Beauregard
<Poiss...@netscape.net> écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval:
>Denis Beauregard wrote:
>>
>> Since I descend too from that De Belleau line and I know Janko
>> for some times. I have a strong feeling that most lines where
>> you turn around for a while will get nowhere or will wait a
>> while before being proven.
>>
>
>Which line is this? This is not the Quebec pioneer Blaise Belleau dit
>Larose is it?
No, it is not. Check under Poitiers du Buisson and Joseph Hebert.
>> Let's consider the main Quebec royal lines.
>>
>[snip various possible lines]
>
>> Amiot-Longueval: from comments I get, once someone in France
>> found the first relevant documents, it goes very fast to find
>> more generations.
>>
>When you say Amiot-Longueval are you referring to Philippe Amiot dit
>Villeneuve
>whose mother-in-law was Antoinette de Longval? If so, then where
>would I be able to get more information regarding this possible royal
>descent?
Be patient, an article will be published.
>I also have some questions regarding other Quebec pioneers. What about
>the Sieur de La Durantaye Olivier Morel de La Durantaye? I know that
>you give a
>number of generations of ascendance for him in your DGO, but it appears
>as though
>the line stays in the minor (?) nobility. Also, has any possible royal
>line
>been investigated for Francois Duval dit Duponthaut whose father was
>Seigneur du Ponthaut Guillaume Duval du Ponthaut? As a seigneur it
>would appear he is at least a member of the minor nobility of Bretagne.
It is possible. I know some lines are studied by descendants
but the best results are obtained when you focus on one case
at a time. So, the searcher I know to have worked on that Morel
line is currently focussing on another line. Personally, I
agree since I descend from the other line, but not from Morel :-)
>Finally, there is Sieur de La Montagne Honore Martel husband of
>Marguerite L'Admiraut. Is the Sieur an indication of nobility or just
>an honorific?
Sieur is often misleading. It means litterally, "owner of a
fief", a fief being some kind of more or less noble land. I am
not sure about what is exactly a fief (in other words, why a
fief and not a seigneurie?), my feeling is the seigneurie has
some kind of autonomy a fief may not have. I know a sieur or
fief is a bit lower compared to a seigneur or seigneurie, but
what is exactly the difference is not obvious. Anyway, a Sieur
can be only a land owner, but can also be a noble.
>Finally, I have visited the Fichier Origine site and I have a question.
>Since you are the guy who maintains the Fichier Origine I figure you're
>the guy to ask. My paternal ancestor is Pierre Boissonniere dit
>Leveille
>(who has no royal line of ascent that I'm aware of) who was a Soldat in
>Les Troupes de La Colonie (what we
>today would call the Marines, I think) and was in Quebec by 24 May 1699
>at the latest. I have not found him listed in the Fichier Origine. Is
>that because you have not located his baptismal document? Or, is it
>because it has not yet been sought? I believe that Jette states he was
>from Fauch, arondissement d'Albi, Languedoc, France (modern day
>Departement de Tarn 81).
As said on the site (and I would damnly like to find some way
to make that obvious because many persons ask the same question),
there are in theory only proven origins (which is far from being
true as many records were not found in France but are in archives
of notaries, army, religious, etc. which are supposed to be copies
of original records).
>BTW, again on the subject of royal descents, Pierre's commanding officer
>was the Sieur de Manthet Nicolas
>D'Ailleboust de Mantet who, it has been suggested here, does have a
>royal line of ascent via the Stuarts of
>Scotland.
But about 3 generations are missing and it has not been possible
to find the parents of Jean de Montet. Moreover, we would need to
prove the link for both way, i.e. from Jean in France to his
parents or at least his father, and from his parents to Jean.
Denis
John P. DuLong
<snip>
> Thru the Braque. One of them married a Guillemette de Montmorency
> (there is a French king 6 generations above her). One problem is the
> difference of social status but a great-nephew or niece married
> another de Montmorency. Anyway, that point seems impossible to prove
> (there is a note about that in the Braque genealogy in D'Hozier I
> think).
My God, I totally forgot about this theory. I do recall it now. We
rejected it because it was so suspecious.
<snip>
> This supports my claim. On one hand, trying with no clue leaded
> nowhere. On the other hand, working with someone on the field
> helped a lot. Like the Longueval case.
You can do it without local support, but it really helps to be able to rely
on someone in France to help with the research.
<snip>
> I am not sure at all Gaboury is the best reference as a starting
> list. Or her list would have to be revised completely. She
> focussed only on the nobility living in New France, not on
> possible noble ancestry. Since that nobility is for most a set
> of militaries who get back to France after 1760, it is not useful.
I agree that Gadboury misses a lot of possible noble families, but she is a
starting point. All we need is a list to start with that can be modified as
resaerch progresses. Perhaps the list you are putting together would fit
the bill.
> At this time, I am that clearinghouse... I examined over 200 printed
> sources when I wrote my GDO to find what was already found. But the
> 10,000 pages of notes from Godbout, plus all the published works
> should be added to a database to organize all that information. My
> problem is I have no more money to continue and will have now to get
> back to a full time job (but I will try a last project before that).
Yes, I would have to agree that your site is the clearinghouse. As you
know, I have always been impressed by your site. I wish you could find a
way to make money on genealogy. Have you ever considered charging for
access to your website. You have great content and I think people would
understand that it costs money to maintain this data. Of course, some will
be displeased with this approach, but most will adjust to it if they find
value with it.
> I have a photocopy of families covered by the Cabinet. It is in
> Fonds Denis Amiot at the SGCF, so we know at least which families
> are there.
Is this just a copy of the index of the Cabinet or do you have copies of the
actual dossiers? Do you have copies of the dossiers for Robineau and
Dejordy?
I really do believe that we are going to see some major royal gateway
breakthroughs for French Canadian and Acadian genealogists. This is going
to be an interesting time for us over the next few years.
Gerard Poissonnier
>
> Le Wed, 23 May 2001 22:17:53 GMT, Gerard Poissonnier
> <Poiss...@netscape.net> écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval:
>
> >Denis Beauregard wrote:
>
> Be patient, an article will be published.
>
I look forward to that article.
>
> Sieur is often misleading. It means litterally, "owner of a
> fief", a fief being some kind of more or less noble land. I am
> not sure about what is exactly a fief (in other words, why a
> fief and not a seigneurie?), my feeling is the seigneurie has
> some kind of autonomy a fief may not have. I know a sieur or
> fief is a bit lower compared to a seigneur or seigneurie, but
> what is exactly the difference is not obvious. Anyway, a Sieur
> can be only a land owner, but can also be a noble.
>
Thank you for that information. I frankly was unsure of the difference
between a Sieur
and a Seigneur, since they both translate into English as Lord. Could
you tell me the
differences between a Seigneur in France and a Seigneur in Nouvelle
France. It seems to me
that the title Seigneur in France implies the person holding the title
is a part of the nobility,
but that that is not the case with the title Seigneur used in Canada.
> >Finally, I have visited the Fichier Origine site and I have a question.
> >Since you are the guy who maintains the Fichier Origine I figure you're
> >the guy to ask. My paternal ancestor is Pierre Boissonniere dit
> >Leveille
> >(who has no royal line of ascent that I'm aware of) who was a Soldat in
> >Les Troupes de La Colonie (what we
> >today would call the Marines, I think) and was in Quebec by 24 May 1699
> >at the latest. I have not found him listed in the Fichier Origine. Is
> >that because you have not located his baptismal document? Or, is it
> >because it has not yet been sought? I believe that Jette states he was
> >from Fauch, arondissement d'Albi, Languedoc, France (modern day
> >Departement de Tarn 81).
>
> As said on the site (and I would damnly like to find some way
> to make that obvious because many persons ask the same question),
> there are in theory only proven origins (which is far from being
> true as many records were not found in France but are in archives
> of notaries, army, religious, etc. which are supposed to be copies
> of original records).
>
> Denis
>
> --
> 0 Denis Beauregard
> /\/ Web de généalogie: http://www.genealogie.com (français)
> |\ Genealogy Web site: http://www.francogene.com (English)
> / |
> oo oo
Merci Beaucoup.
Thank you very much for the informative and timely response.
--Gerard
Denis Beauregard
<Poiss...@netscape.net> écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval:
There is legally no difference. New France was part of France until
1763. However, the context is somewhat different and France was not
unified.
In France, there was a transmission of titles from a time period where
we just don't know who was the first lord. In New France, we usually
know him/her. So, in France, you see the line of predecessors which
is not visible in New France.
Also, the law was not the same in all places in France. The "coutume"
which is the usual set of laws was depending on the area (and it was
not following the border of provinces, but more likely the area under
the influence of major towns). New France was following Coutume de
Paris.
But anyway, you have the feeling the seigneur was always noble likely
because you see the France seigneurs at an earlier time. At the
end of the Old Regime in France, the privileges of the nobility and
the gap between social classes were probably smaller compared to
2 centuries before.
Denis Beauregard
<dul...@habitant.org> écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval:
>"Denis Beauregard" <denis....@genealogie.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I have a photocopy of families covered by the Cabinet. It is in
>> Fonds Denis Amiot at the SGCF, so we know at least which families
>> are there.
>
>Is this just a copy of the index of the Cabinet or do you have copies of the
>actual dossiers? Do you have copies of the dossiers for Robineau and
>Dejordy?
A copy of the index of course, not of the content !!! The only
files from what I think to be in Cabinet des titres is a few
pages on a microfilm at ANQ for De la Saussaye and another family
(I don't remember which) and the many notes of Godbout).
>I really do believe that we are going to see some major royal gateway
>breakthroughs for French Canadian and Acadian genealogists. This is going
>to be an interesting time for us over the next few years.
Indeed.
R.-Yves Gagné
Denis you said about Jean de Monteth that 3 generations were missing.
Nonetheless, there is an authentic document, the contract of mariage
of 18 July 1594, which proves that Jean de Monteth IS a descendant of
the earl of Montrose, so of Robert III, king of Scotland. The missing
generations, which are still uncertain while there was a Monteth
family connected with the descendants of the earl of Montrose, are not
a reason to put aside the contract of mariage and the fact that Jean
de Monteth is of royal descent. (see Roland-Yves Gagné, Qui était
Jehan de Monteth, écuyer, seigneur d’Argentenay, ancêtre des
d’Ailleboust ?, « Mémoires de la Société généalogique canadienne
française », volume 51, no 1, printemps 2000 (No 223) p. 71-85.)
I am working on many gateway ancestors but I cannot go faster than the
publication of genealogical magazines and faster than someone can do
as genealogy is a hobby and I still have to work. The next issue of
the Mémoires will contain an article on someone new on the list of
people of royal descent. And I am working on other articles which
will be published when completed, on settlers in New France who were
not mentioned in the above exchange of emails but whose names will be
published only when the proof of royal descent is made with authentic
documents. For example, Denis you were mentioning Olivier Morel de la
Durantaye. I found a lot of new names in his family tree : some
belong to well known families. The links have yet to be made and, as
you mentioned earlier, I am working right now in priority on the
family tree of another settler.
Yours, Roland-Yves Gagné
Denis Beauregard
Gagné) écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval:
>Hi,
>
>Denis you said about Jean de Monteth that 3 generations were missing.
>Nonetheless, there is an authentic document, the contract of mariage
>of 18 July 1594, which proves that Jean de Monteth IS a descendant of
>the earl of Montrose, so of Robert III, king of Scotland. The missing
>generations, which are still uncertain while there was a Monteth
>family connected with the descendants of the earl of Montrose, are not
>a reason to put aside the contract of mariage and the fact that Jean
>de Monteth is of royal descent. (see Roland-Yves Gagné, Qui était
>Jehan de Monteth, écuyer, seigneur d’Argentenay, ancêtre des
>d’Ailleboust ?, « Mémoires de la Société généalogique canadienne
>française », volume 51, no 1, printemps 2000 (No 223) p. 71-85.)
But you will recognize you identified John Gordon who is
named in the same marriage contract, where he is a cousin
of Jean by their "grand-mothers daughter of the earl of
Montrose". In other words, John Gordon and Jean de Montet
have the same common ancestry, that earl of Montrose.
And in the ancestors of that John Gordon, we can't find
any thing that matches that ancestry or his relation
to Jean.
Perhaps, one of our fellows may find the missing link ?
I presume there is no change since my old notes...
1. John GORDON, born 1-9-1544, studied in France ca1565-67,
1568-72 served Mary (Stuart ?), then "gentilhomme ordinaire"
of Charles IX, Henri III and IV, x 1576 Antoinette de MAROLLES
(died 1591), x 1594 Genevieve PITAU, back to Scotland in 1603,
died 1619, was Sieur de Long-Orme
2- Alexander GORDON, bishop elect of Galloway
3- Barbara LOGIE, died after 1575
4- John GORDON, master of Huntly, x ca1510, + 1517
5- Jane DRUMMOND, natural daughter of James IV, born 1497
6- .. Laird of LOGIE of Ennis
7- must be the daughter of Earl of MONTROSE (but not identified)
8. Alexander GORDON, 3rd Earl of Huntly, m avant 1482
9. Jean Stewart, d 1510
10. James IV, born 1472/3, d 1513
11. Margaret DRUMMOND
14. must be ... 1st or 2nd Earl of MONTROSE
15. ...
16. Georges Gordon, m twice
17. Princess Annabella or Elizabeth Hay
18. John Stewart, 1st Earl of Atholl, born ca1440, d 1512, m twice
19. Margaret Douglas or Eleonore Sinclair
20. James III, born 1451, d 1488
21. Margaret of Denmark, d 1486
22. John Drummond, 1st Lord Drummond, quoted 1470, d 1519, Lord of
Menteith
23. Elizabeth Lindsay of Crawford
MONTROSE, William, 1st Earl of Montrose, born 1463, d 1513
* x 1479
DRUMMOND, Annabella her sister is an ancestor of John Gordon
(5 or 11 ?)
MONTROSE, William, 2nd Earl of Montrose
* x 1515
KEITH, Jane
No known daughter of these earls married a Gordon, a Logie or a
Stewart of Menteith.
Despite there is an authentic document (which is nothing else
that the words of John Gordon and Jean de Montet), we can't
find any other information that matches it... This is why I can't
say my ancestor Jean de Montet is a royal descent because he is
the great-grand-father of an earl of Montrose: we have thus far
nothing to confirm that.
R.-Yves Gagné
> But you will recognize you identified John Gordon who is
> named in the same marriage contract, where he is a cousin
> of Jean by their "grand-mothers daughter of the earl of
> Montrose". In other words, John Gordon and Jean de Montet
> have the same common ancestry, that earl of Montrose.
>
Denis, do I have to repeat a 15 page text already published about this
issue? John Gordon is, and it is proven, descendant of a Drummond
whose sister was married with the first earl of Montrose. Moreover,
John Gordon, cousin of the Queen of Scotland (Mary Stuart...) and
Gentleman of the bed chamber of French Kings, had no reason to lie by
stating to be second or third or fourth cousin of one John Menteth
(Jean de Monteth) on 18 July 1594, when Jean de Monteth got married in
Paris. John Gordon is not a decendant of any earl of Montrose, and
there is no need to spend another 50 years of research about it
(trying to prove he was a descendant while he was not at all). By
being a genuine descendant of the 1st earl of Montrose, as explained
in detailed in my article, Jean de Monteth WAS a remote cousin of John
Gordon, through the Drummond sisters. Or you claim that the contract
of mariage of 1594 was a complete fraud, and I do not see any reason
it was, or we try to explain what the reality was, and this is what I
explained already in the article mentioned in my previous email.
Your friend, R.-Yves Gagné
Denis Beauregard
Gagné) wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval:
>Denis Beauregard <denis....@genealogie.com.invalid> wrote in message news:<3o7ugtknfs9f3ksp2...@4ax.com>...
>
>> But you will recognize you identified John Gordon who is
>> named in the same marriage contract, where he is a cousin
>> of Jean by their "grand-mothers daughter of the earl of
>> Montrose". In other words, John Gordon and Jean de Montet
>> have the same common ancestry, that earl of Montrose.
>>
>
>Denis, do I have to repeat a 15 page text already published about this
>issue? John Gordon is, and it is proven, descendant of a Drummond
>whose sister was married with the first earl of Montrose. Moreover,
>John Gordon, cousin of the Queen of Scotland (Mary Stuart...) and
But, you make my point ! You have an authentic document but thus
far, you don't get the same results by reading the document and
by searching the ancestors of John Gordon.
>Gentleman of the bed chamber of French Kings, had no reason to lie by
>stating to be second or third or fourth cousin of one John Menteth
>(Jean de Monteth) on 18 July 1594, when Jean de Monteth got married in
>Paris. John Gordon is not a decendant of any earl of Montrose, and
But in the document, he said he was. And you want to use the
same document to say that Jean de Montet was too.
>there is no need to spend another 50 years of research about it
>(trying to prove he was a descendant while he was not at all). By
>being a genuine descendant of the 1st earl of Montrose, as explained
>in detailed in my article, Jean de Monteth WAS a remote cousin of John
>Gordon, through the Drummond sisters. Or you claim that the contract
>of mariage of 1594 was a complete fraud, and I do not see any reason
I don't say it is a fraud, just that the information on it
doesn't match what can be verified at this time. So, I think
we should interpret the Montet ancestry to match the Gordon
ancestry, that is to presume Jean de Montet is a descendant
from a 3rd Drummond sister and not from the earl of Montrose.
In other words, to adjust the statement in view of what is
known.
By the way, there is a John Menteith married to a Janet Drummond
and quoted in 1480 (about the lands of Rednock).
If URL http://hometown.aol.com/ttrim36387/graham.html is reliable,
we have that:
8. Sir John DRUMMOND
[created Lord Drummond]
b. ca. 1438, d. 1519,
m. Elizabeth LINDSAY, b. Abt 1440, liv 22 Sep 1509, and had
issue,
i. Sir William [see Next]
ii. Elizabeth, b. Abt 1460, m. by Mar 1487/8, George DOUGLAS
iii. Annabell, b. Abt 1460, d. by 17 Mar 1504/5, m. 25 Nov
1479, William GRAHAM, b. Abt 1463
iv. Margaret, b. ca. 1460, d. Apr 1502, m. James IV STEWART
v. Eupheme, b. ca. 1467, m. John FLEMING, b. Abt 1465
vi. Beatrix, b. ca. 1477, affair with James HAMILTON, b. Abt
1475, d. by 21 Jul 1529
iii married William GRAHAM Earl of Montrose
iv had a natural child by James IV who is the great-grand-mother
of John Gordon
So, our Jean de Montet should be issued from another child.
i. William, no match in that web site
ii., v. and vi. Elizabeth, Eupheme and Beatrix
some descendants married to or had affair with
Stewart/Stuart, but wrong lines or too late
Since neither Gordon not Menteith were genealogists or notaries,
it is quite possible, with all the Stewart around, and knowing
Jean was a Stewart of Menteith that they presumed some relation
from that. Since this kind of data is always not complete enough,
further search in that direction may lead somewhere, who knows ?
>it was, or we try to explain what the reality was, and this is what I
>explained already in the article mentioned in my previous email.
>
>Your friend, R.-Yves Gagné
Genealogiquement
Gerard Poissonnier
Mr Gagne --
I would like to thank you and your colleagues (especially also John P.
Dulong for his
informative web site http://habitant.org) for the research you and your
colleagues did regarding
Catherine de Baillon. As you may have guessed, she is one of my
ancestors (on my father's side).
When I began doing my genealogy I had no idea that I would find as many
ancestors, for as many generations back, as I have found. I also had no
idea that I would find any sort of royal descent. Had someone told me
that I would find such a descent, I would have laughed at the
suggestion. I have also found
that genealogy is highly addictive.
Now, from Denis' earlier post, I have learned that I may possibly have a
second royal descent, this time
on my mother's side (both of my maternal grandparents are descended from
the couple he mentioned). I believe that I brought up Olivier Morel de
La Durantaye, as I asked Denis about the possibility of a royal descent
for him. He is another ancestor on my father's side. I look forward to
the forthcoming article you mention in the "Memoires" and to buying a
copy (once the ordering info is online) of your recently published book
on the ancestry of Catherine de Baillon. I also hope that you will at
some point again take up your research on Olivier Morel de La Durantaye
and will publish an article regarding what you find, regardless of
whether he has a royal descent.
I am still working on verifying and filling out my Quebec and Acadian
ancestry. Once I have finished that,
I would like to do research on my ancestors who lived in France,
although that can be difficult from this side
of the Atlantic.
Thanks again.
--Gerard Poissonnier
John P. DuLong
"Gerard Poissonnier" <Poiss...@netscape.net> wrote:
<snip> > I look forward to
> the forthcoming article you mention in the "Memoires" and to buying a
> copy (once the ordering info is online) of your recently published book
> on the ancestry of Catherine de Baillon.
<snip>
The Société généalogique canadienne française web page announcing the
publication of our Baillon book can be found at
http://www.sgcf.com/baillonpub.htm. All it says for cost is "...est offert
au coût de 32 $ plus la TPS." TPS is a tax in Québec. I will ask them
again for a clearer statement of whether or not this includes postage, if
Americans have to pay the TPS, and if it is $32USA for Americans?
R.-Yves Gagné
Thanks Gerard. I decided to "reactivate" my Morel de la Durantaye
file and wrote few letters during the week end. I have been close to
finishing this file but became busy on another one. I will try to
complete everything before the end of 2001.
Denis, I just reiterate my position. Since 1945, many genealogists
(and both of us) tried to understand what the contract of mariage of
18 July 1594 in Paris meant, researching in Edinburgh,Perth and Paris.
I think, after 55 years, I found the only possible solution. My
correspondants in Scotland told me I had looked at any possible
records. We can start theories on many things, but I do not believe
that looking at the existing deeds of the XVI century, another
solution is possible. I just dream that we can find more info one day
on Donald Monteith of Carwhin (the possible father of our Jean de
Monteth), if he really got the barony of Carwhin through a mariage
with a member of the family of Robertson, baron of Carwhin, the last
family being proven to be connected with a descendant of the earl of
Montrose.
Have a good day everyone, R.-Yves Gagné
Denis Beauregard
<dul...@habitant.org> écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval:
>
>"Gerard Poissonnier" <Poiss...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
><snip> > I look forward to
>> the forthcoming article you mention in the "Memoires" and to buying a
>> copy (once the ordering info is online) of your recently published book
>> on the ancestry of Catherine de Baillon.
><snip>
>
>The Société généalogique canadienne française web page announcing the
>publication of our Baillon book can be found at
>http://www.sgcf.com/baillonpub.htm. All it says for cost is "...est offert
>au coût de 32 $ plus la TPS." TPS is a tax in Québec. I will ask them
>again for a clearer statement of whether or not this includes postage, if
>Americans have to pay the TPS, and if it is $32USA for Americans?
The rule of thumb at SGCF is to pay one for one, the difference
being used for the extra posting, i.e. $US 32 for not members, no GST
for not Canadian purchasers. It is the same rule that applies with
nearly all other genealogical societies I know of and Drouin Institute
does the same since the beginning of this year. It seems I am the
only one who doesn't apply the 1 for 1 rule for my personal books (but
a lot of people said they were underpriced).
Pat Silva Corbera
Also is the Gil Gordon noted below related to John Gordon?
Gil Gordon married to D. Maria Anes Loureiro parents of Alvaro Alvares Carvalho who was married to D. Beatrice Escorcia/Drummond daughter of Sir John V Drummond and D. Branca Afonso?
Thank You,
Pat Silva Corbera
Janko Pavsic
Roland-Yves Gagné, "Qui était Jehan Monteth, écuyer, seigneur
d'Argentenay, ancêtre des d'Ailleboust ?", in «Mémoires de la Société
généalogique canadienne-française», volume 51 numéro 1 cahier 223
printemps 2000. (1 issue 7,50 CAN + 15% taxes). Info at
http://www.sgcf.com
Société généalogique canadienne-française
3440 Davidson, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H1W 2Z5
514-527-1010
Janko Pavsic
Editor for Mémoires