On 2016-06-29 21:01:55 +0000, taf said: > On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 5:47:55 AM UTC-7, Patrick Nielsen Hayden wrote: >> I've looked at this> >> (gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5424948p/f384.image), but of course I> >> don't speak or read French, more's the pity. Anyone who felt like> >> offering a translation would certainly bask in my appreciation. >> > > (My translation, with a few liberties) Thanks _very_ much for going to this amount of trouble. Very illuminating. >> What I do note from a fairly simple Google search is that lots of> >> modern historians appear to take it as established that Baldwin de> >> Toulouse was a son of Raymond V de Toulouse by his wife Constance,> >> daughter of Louis VI, and thus a brother to the Raymond VI who had him> >> murdered. Example:> >> https://books.google.com/books?id=eTEj0T6u7zUC&pg=PA23&lpg=PA23&dq=baldwin+of+toulouse+executed+1212&source=bl&ots=UbCjULBP5r&sig=SlTXBa-fgZKXj1wKKS_OVF5AAwQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjswbnHgcvNAhWJ2D4KHYPJApQQ6AEIJzAC#v=onepage&q=baldwin%20of%20toulouse%20executed%201212&f=false>>> >> Is this a case of something that was an open question in 1867 having> >> been resolved in more modern times? Or is it a case of historians> >> simply not paying attention to genealogists, and continuing to> >> propagate a centuries-old assumption regardless of lack of evidence, >> or> even evidence discrediting it? > > > They are probably just following the most accessible source, Histoire > de Languedoc, not realizing this only represents one of several > solutions. The more interested I become in genealogy, the more I realize that--generally speaking--historians, even very good ones, cannot be relied upon to be accurate about it. This is perhaps less of a shock than it might be, because early in our careers as book editors, my wife and I worked as associate editors of an encyclopedic reference series about literary history (specifically, the history of literary criticism), and had occasion to get deep into the weeds with other, similar reference works such as the Cambridge Guide to Literature in English. Which brought us face-to-face with the fact that almost all of these distinguished academic projects are shot through with jawdropping errors of easily-demonstrated fact. My current favorite example of this is the fact that the generally excellent Oxford _Dictionary of National Biography_, in its entry on Matilda, countess of Chester (d. 1189), mother of the much-discussed Hugh who was never actually called by his contemporaries "Cyfeiliog" ... says that she was a daughter of "Robert, earl of Gloucester (d. 1147), and Sibyl, the daughter of Roger de Montgomery, earl of Shrewsbury (d. 1157)". Between CP and various other reputable sources, I'm pretty sure that Sibyl, daughter of Roger de Montgomery, was not Robert's wife but his mother-in-law; Robert married her daughter Mabel fitz Hamon, who was the actual person who "d. 1157". The point isn't that Experts Suck; the point is that getting this stuff right is _hard_, and there isn't some chrome-and-titanium-plated tower of all-knowing geniuses out there making sure that everything that gets published is super-accurate and true. It's down to all of us, which is both pathetic and a little invigorating, when you think about it. -- Patrick Nielsen Hayden pnh@panix.com about.me/patricknh http://nielsenhayden.com/genealogy-tng/index.php

On 21/06/16 08:49, Andrew Lancaster via wrote: > For what it is worth, I do not see any pattern whereby the wikis being > used for large scale online genealogy (such as Werelate and Wikitree) > are worse than things like Geni. I would actually argue that their > quality tends to be better? Wikitree certainly fails my spot test for medieval genealogy. It lists Sir John Goddard's wife as Matilda Neville. It also goes one further in giving him a date and place of death as 1386 in Mildenhall, Wiltshire although to be fair there is a question mark after it. Needless to say, it was created by a GEDCOM import. The page claims to have a manager but if a manager isn't weeding out such dross from their imports in over 5 years since the import date there really is no point in getting involved in trying to help them - life's too short. -- Hotmail is my spam bin. Real address is ianng at austonley org uk

On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 8:42:59 AM UTC-7, Thomas Milton Tinney, Sr. wrote: > REPLY: > Your commentary is not impressive. Mr. Tinney's denialism has again led him to distort the scientific record. taf

On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 1:23:53 PM UTC-7, Hovite wrote: > As is often the case with ponderous historical works, the best bits are > the footnotes. On page 17, footnote 41, there is a brief mention of a life > of Elfred attributed to Asser. McTurk seems to accept the work is genuine. Sorry, do you mean McGuigan (I ask just for clarification, as there is also a McTurk active in the field)? > However, it seems to me that Galbraith and Smyth were correct when they > claimed that it is a later forgery, consisting of material recycled from > the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, padded out with junk. This is still subject to debate, and at least my reading of contemporary scholars favors its authenticity, in some form. I have not read Galbraith, but Smyth never impressed me. I just can't take seriously is defense of Ragnar Lothbrok as a historical entity. It should also be pointed out that we do not have the original manuscript for Asser any longer, and Sisam has already made a strong argument that the version of the Wessex pedigree in the modern editions of Asser have incorporated material from ASC not found in the original. I might add that the two explanations are not mutually exclusive - it need not be a forgery. It could have been written by Asser during Alfred's lifetime, yet still consist of details from the ASC (or the ASC precursors) padded out with junk. > As I have suggested previously, I suspect that Ealhmund, Ecgberht, > Ethelwulf, and Elfred belonged to the Kentish line that included two > previous Kings Ecgberht. There is definitely a scholarly undercurrent that takes this view, but most are not willing to go this far, and still accept the descent from Ine's family (some proposing a maternal Kentish connection). taf

On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 03:22:53 -0700 (PDT), WJH <james@haddocks.net> wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval: >On the question of theft, I agree with you about the importance of citations and also with Stewart's point about some people mis-using sources, but to some extent that's why I hold by the main point of my posts, which is that wikis will always be rubbish if the people who have the knowledge and experience to make them better don't get involved. And why would they get involved ? Someone already having a site, paying for his own site, won't spend time to help someone to copy from his site... I spend 10 years of my life to build my database. I sure won't give my work for free to wannabees that knows about nothing to genealogy. Visit wikitree and you will see almost no knowledge. Only copy. Denis -- Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG) Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/ French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/ Sur cédérom à 1785 - On CD-ROM to 1785

On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:49:27 +0200, Andrew Lancaster via <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com> wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval: >Denis Beauregard wrote: > > >Asking money to support wikis? They are made of stealing material, so >why would someone who accept to use stolen material accepts to pay for it ? > >No one is asking for money for wikis. A wiki can be set-up for free and It is common that wikipedia asks for money. When a site has a huge number of visitors, it will need money to survive. wikitree will do the same thing later. >have whatever policies or editors it wants. Also, I have no idea what >you mean by "stealing", but I can not think of anything being discussed >which amounts to stealing. > >If citation of other sources is "stealing" then all researchers are >"stealing". If what you are talking about is the need for proper >citations of sources, then this seems to me to come under the general >category of quality control, which also has other aspects to it. (For >what it is worth, many well-known wikis have policies that all material >should be properly cited. Policies do not always equate to reality of >course.) I have seen cloning of pages on my site on wikitree and other similar sites. http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Coutu-22 http://www.wikitree.com/g2g/10499/is-there-any-evidence-for-this-person etc. In many pages, they copied my list of sources. No one there has ever tried to check anything from sources. They copy and copy and copy. For example, in the Longueval medieval line, no one in wikitree is quoting the original research !!! In the few pages I checked to write my answer, I saw almost no reference to an original source (there are plenty images of records for free on familysearch). It is almost always a mess to understand what is the source for what. This is stealing, not researching. No one is even trying to link data to records when available. Denis -- Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG) Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/ French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/ Sur cédérom à 1785 - On CD-ROM to 1785

On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 5:47:55 AM UTC-7, Patrick Nielsen Hayden wrote: > I've looked at this > (gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5424948p/f384.image), but of course I > don't speak or read French, more's the pity. Anyone who felt like > offering a translation would certainly bask in my appreciation. > (My translation, with a few liberties) Lautrec is a viscounty in Languedoc, in the Diocese of Castres that gave its name to one of the most ancient families of the kingdom that, we are told by a Memoir, consists of two branches, established in Gaillac (in Albigeois), and at Castres. The origins of this family has been of frequent interest to scholars and genealogists. It is accepted that Bertrand and Sicard, brothers and Viscounts of Lautrec in the 13th century gave rise to the branches of the family, and there is agreement that they descend from the ancient Counts of Toulouse. Olharagay suggested Raymond III, Count of Toulouse,was brother of Baldwin, Viscount of Lautrec, father of Peter (husband of Alice de Lautrec), who had Bertrand and Sicard. Borrel in his Antiquities de Castres, suggested that Baldwin was son of Raymond III. Labbe & Louvet thought Baldwin was son of Bertrand by the Countess of Rabastens, and was grandson of Raymond VI. He married Alice de Lautrec, heiress of the ancient viscounts ans through her the name and arms of Lautrec passed.As a result, their son Frotard was Viscount and passed the name and arms to his children Bertrand and Sicard. Finally others, following the authors of Histoire de Languedoc, simplify this descent, saying that Baldwin, son of Raymond, was put to death for taking up arms against his brother Raymond VI and his property confiscated. He is supposed to have married Alice de Lautrec, on whom the inheritance of the Viscounty of Lautrec devolved through the death of Frotard, her unmarried brother. They conclude that Bertrand and Sicard are sons of Baldwin, who by reason of the confiscation only inherited Lautrec. THey see confirmation of this in the seals of Sicard's children, observing that of the three brothers, one uses the arms of Toulouse; the second those of Lautrec, and the third quarters Toulouse and Lautrec, and they conclude, with good reason, that they would not have dared use the arms of Toulouse were they not of this house. (brief summary of rest) (Even though some uninformed hacks call it an invention, in the 14th century their descent from the Counts was known, and in the 15th they stated it before the Parliament of Toulouse. The marriage contract of Baldwin and Alix was said to have survived in Carcassonne. Finally the houses of Ambres and Arpajon, intermarried with the Lautrec in the 14th century, quartered Toulouse, demonstrating Lautrec were linked to the Counts.) > What I do note from a fairly simple Google search is that lots of > modern historians appear to take it as established that Baldwin de > Toulouse was a son of Raymond V de Toulouse by his wife Constance, > daughter of Louis VI, and thus a brother to the Raymond VI who had him > murdered. Example: > https://books.google.com/books?id=eTEj0T6u7zUC&pg=PA23&lpg=PA23&dq=baldwin+of+toulouse+executed+1212&source=bl&ots=UbCjULBP5r&sig=SlTXBa-fgZKXj1wKKS_OVF5AAwQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjswbnHgcvNAhWJ2D4KHYPJApQQ6AEIJzAC#v=onepage&q=baldwin%20of%20toulouse%20executed%201212&f=false > > > Is this a case of something that was an open question in 1867 having > been resolved in more modern times? Or is it a case of historians > simply not paying attention to genealogists, and continuing to > propagate a centuries-old assumption regardless of lack of evidence, or > even evidence discrediting it? They are probably just following the most accessible source, Histoire de Languedoc, not realizing this only represents one of several solutions. taf

On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 18:22:12 -0700 (PDT), Nicole Dubois <madlady6250@gmail.com> wrote in soc.genealogy.medieval: >On Thursday, December 11, 2003 at 7:48:51 PM UTC-7, Kevan Barton wrote: >> Folks, >> >> Is there a list of known medieval connections to early New France (Quebec) >> settlers? If so, would you be so kind as to share it, or let me know >> where it is? >> >> Cheers, >> Kevan > >Hi Kevan, >I have 2 leads in my family. My grandmother on my father's side is a Courville dite De Billy. I have the generations back into france with them. I was always told there was a connection there to a king. Which one, I'm not too sure. Antoine De Billy, s/o Jean De Billy and Jeanne De Puiseux, married on Feb. 21, 1402/03 to Pernelle De Villiers, d/o Jean de Villiers and Jeanne de Vallengoujart. Pernelle was supposed to be the cousin to a king... I have been trying to find the cousin link, but still do not know where it is exactly. The parents of the pioneer are unknown. Anything you will read about his "parents" is bogus, hypothetical, wrong, fiction, unproven (chose your word). This for parents of Jean François de Billy http://www.francogene.com/genealogie-quebec-genealogy/015/015975.php >On the other hand, my great grandmother on my mother's side was a Beauchamp who married into the Belanger line. I have gone back down the Beauchamp line to 1560, and from there I hit a wall. So I tried coming back from the first Beauchamp in France. One went to fight in England with William duke of Normandy. He and his family became very wealthy. The daughter of Thomas Beauchamp, the then Earl of Warwick, married 3 times her name was Marguerite Beauchamp. She had children with her first husband, and a daughter with the last one. The daughter was Margaret Beaufort, her father was the earl of Beaufort. She became the mother of King Henry VII and the grandmother to Henry VIII. I am looking to see who came back to france to form my great grandmother's line, but I have been hitting walls for a long time. So, now you know of at least 2 families that came west. I also have Abraham Martin's line since his daughter married a "Ratie"(Rate) and a son of hers Pierre Rate had a daughter who This looks like bogus. You should indicate who is the immigrant, i.e. first in New France. Thus far, no Beauchamp is even close to nobility. The parents of our Abraham Martin are unknown. >married into my mother's line the Paradis. I have the Paradis line, back into France in 1575, and the Martin line to about 1451 in Germany with Viet Martin. >My father's line is the "Dubois" line. I go back to 1645 in St.Hilaire-Foissac in what is now Bas-Limousin. >So, if you wish you can contact me at... madlady6250@gmail.com. I will help all I can. Good luck with your searches. Nicole Dubois You seem to believe anything you see on the web. If at least you would indicate clearly the pioneers so that we can tell you it is wrong... Denis -- Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG) Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/ French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/ Sur cédérom à 1785 - On CD-ROM to 1785

Le Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:09:19 -0500, Patricia A. Junkin via <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com> écrivait dans soc.genealogy.medieval: >The following appears in the will of Nicholas Louvaine. >des quelles ie achatay leritage Old French for: desquelles j'ai acheté l'héritage Same translation as given by Richard. Denis -- Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG) Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/ French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/ Sur cédérom à 1785 - On CD-ROM to 1785

As is often the case with ponderous historical works, the best bits are the footnotes. On page 17, footnote 41, there is a brief mention of a life of Elfred attributed to Asser. McTurk seems to accept the work is genuine. However, it seems to me that Galbraith and Smyth were correct when they claimed that it is a later forgery, consisting of material recycled from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, padded out with junk. As I have suggested previously, I suspect that Ealhmund, Ecgberht, Ethelwulf, and Elfred belonged to the Kentish line that included two previous Kings Ecgberht. The Ecgberht who took Wessex in 802 had fled from Kent to France thirteen years previously, after Kent was conquered by a combined force led by Osfrith of Mercia and his son-in-law and ally Berthric of Wessex. One would have expected Asser to have known this, but instead the biography merely repeats the obviously false genealogy from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, which traces the ancestry of Elfred back to Adam. The biography does not explain how Ecgberht acquired Wessex. Indeed, it does not mention Ecgberht at all. However, the author did find space for a curious story about the death of Berthric: “There was in Mercia, in recent times, a certain valiant king, who was feared by all the kings and neighbouring states around. His name was Offa, and it was he who had the great rampart made from sea to sea between Britain and Mercia. His daughter, named Eadburh, was married to Berthric, King of the West Saxons; who immediately, having the king's affections, and the control of almost all the kingdom, began to live tyrannically like her father, and to execrate every man whom Berthric loved, and to do all things hateful to god and man, and to accuse all she could before the king, and so to deprive them insidiously of their life or power; and if she could not obtain the king's consent, she used to take them off by poison: as is ascertained to have been the case with a certain young man beloved by the king, whom she poisoned, finding that the king would not listen to any accusation against him. It is said, moreover, that king Berthric unwittingly tasted of the poison, though the queen intended to give it to the young man only, and so both of them perished.” That story reads like a fairy tale. It is clearly not derived from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, which has just this: “This year was the moon eclipsed, at eight in the evening, on the seventeenth day before the calends of February; and soon after died King Berhtric and ealdorman Wor. Ecgberht succeeded to the West Saxon kingdom; and the same day Ethelmund, ealdorman of Hwicce, rode over the Thames at Kempsford; where he was met by ealdorman Wiohstan, with the men of Wiltshire, and a terrible conflict ensued, in which both the ealdormen were slain, but the men of Wiltshire obtained the victory.” Not much is known about Berhtric, but his name does not suggest that he was related to the previous or subsequent kings. His accession, like that of Ecgberht, was drenched in blood: “Cyneheard slew King Cynewulf, and was slain himself, and eighty-four men with him. Then Berhtric undertook the government of the West-Saxons, and reigned sixteen years.” Some information might be obtained from his charters, as witness lists often include members of the royal family, such as sons or brothers. However, no royal children are mentioned in the three surviving charters of Berhtric. S267, dated 794, which is a grant by Berhtric to ealdorman Wigfrith, has an abbreviated witness list that provides no information. S268 (K180, B282), which is an undated grant by Berhtric to ealdorman Lulla, was witnessed by Queen Eadburh, followed by several ealdormen: Wor, Wiohstan, Wigfrith, Wiohtbrord, Æse, Ealhmund, and finally Lulla himself. The first two witnesses are the two West Saxon ealdormen who died in 802 S269 (K158, B258) is an undated grant by Berhtric to ealdorman Hemele, and was witnessed by ealdormen Hemele, Wor, Beornfrith, Wingfrith, Lunling, Wingfrith, and Wingbeald. Lunling, here described as Lunlinges subreguli, was most likely the same person as Lulla. One (or both) of the ealdoremen Wingfrith is probably Wigfrith. S270 (K234, B411), is a Kentish charter of Ecgbert, in which he is styled Ecgberhtus rex Cantie necnon et aliarum gentium. It survives as a corrupt copy, with the date given 773, probably an error for 833. That is to say, the original date was DCCCXXXIII, miscopied as DCCLXXIII. It will be recalled that in 823 Ecgbert sent his son Ethelwulf to recover Kent. S270a (K178), dated 801, is a most fascinating document. It is a grant to a thegn named Eadgils. The name of donor is given as Edbirtus rex. It cannot be an error for Ecgberht, as he did not acquire Wessex until 802. The somewhat muddled witness list includes Wigfrith, Lulla, and Wiohtbrord, who also witnessed S268, together with Queen Eadburh. It has therefore been suggested that the donor was Queen Eadburh, although this would require Edburga regina to have been miscopied as Edbirtus rex (perhaps not so difficult it the original text contained contractions or abbreviations). Also, it was unusual (but not impossible) for Anglo-Saxon queens to issue charters in their own name. One explanation could be that Berhtric was already dead, and was succeeded by his widow (like Cenwealh and Seaxburh in 672). So maybe Asser was right after all; perhaps Eadburh did poison Berhtric, who then enjoyed a brief reign before fleeing to France, where she would have been able to advise Ecgberht that Berhtric was dead. Although the biography of Elfred fails to mention who succeed Berhtric, it does recount the fate of his widow: “Berhtric therefore, being dead, the queen could remain no longer among the West Saxons, but sailed beyond the sea with immense treasures, and went to the court of the great and famous Charles, King of the Franks. As she stood before the throne, and offered him money, Charles said to her: Choose, Eadburh, between me and my son, who stands here with me. She replied, foolishly, and without deliberation: If I am to have my choice, I choose your son, because he is younger than you. At which Charles smiled and answered: If you had chosen me, you would have had my son; but as you have chosen him, you shall not have either of us. However, he gave her a large convent of nuns, in which, having laid aside the secular habit and taken the religious dress, she discharged the office of abbess during a few years; for, as she is said to have lived irrationally in her own country, so she appears to have acted still more so in that foreign country; for being convicted of having had unlawful intercourse with a man of her own nation, she was expelled from the monastery by order of King Charles, and lived a vicious life of reproach in poverty and misery until her death; so that at last, accompanied by one slave only, as we have heard from many who saw her, she begged her bread daily at Pavia, and so miserably died.”

Em terça-feira, 28 de junho de 2016 01:02:30 UTC+1, Peter Stewart escreveu: > On Monday, June 27, 2016 at 11:40:20 PM UTC+10, taf wrote: > > On Monday, June 27, 2016 at 5:41:59 AM UTC-7, paulorica...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > Well the genealogist seems to be Edd Man do you ever heard of him. > > > > Let's go at this a different way. Addressing whether Ed Mann is > > competent to reach a definitive conclusion on the question takes us a > > step away from the issue. Ay time it becomes a question of the > > genealogists rather than of the evidence, we are making it about > > modern peope rather than about medieval people. > > Though I agree with this up to a point, I don't think Ed Mann's competence has been put at issue in this thread. > > The poster apparently found the information in a post from Ed and asked if he was a known authority, not whether he was definitively right on the specific matter. > > I replied that Ed was a diligent "gatherer", reflecting on his methodology but not implying anything about his competence. > > In my view a "gatherer" may be as capable as a "hunter" of resolving such a problem as this - the "gatherer" may know the primary evidence quite adequately at second hand, and may also know more about differing analyses of it than a "hunter" who has found it directly and thought about it from only one perspective. > > The secondary literature of medieval genealogy (including the archive of this newsgroup) has plenty of examples where old errors have been made anew by "hunter" researchers who did not gather that someone else had already corrected a mistake. > > Peter Stewart Well I know Ed Mann uses in some of his genealogical notes the connection William the Conqueror-Gundreda that is much more unlikely than the connection Millicent de Rethel-William de Camville..

I just wanted to point out that Robert, 1st Earl of Orkney, married his legitimate daughter Elizabeth Stewart to James Sinclair of Murchil, styled Master of Caithness, according the SP article on "Sinclair, Earl of Caithness." https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015008828538;view=1up;seq=368 James Sinclair of Murchil was the son of Lord Darnley's widow, Jean Hepburn, by her second husband, John Sinclair, also Master of Caithness. One of the sons of James Sinclair and Elizabeth Stewart of Orkney was called Francis, probably, as with the other Francis Sinclair and (presumably) Francis Mudie, in honor of their close familial connection to Francis Stewart, 5th Earl of Bothwell.

Very interesting. I was aware of the problems with the Hawksworth connection, but the other flaws you point out in the Smyth lineage are new to me. Thank you for your careful analysis. My wife descends from the Smyths through James Smyth, the Archdeacon of Meath. We will have to review her notes on the Smyths and make some modifications.

Another question from a "gatherer". Denis Beauregard, in his _Genealogy of the French in North America_ (www.francogene.com/genealogy/gfna.php, the full version of which is an excellent purchase for any monolingual English-speaker with extensive Quebec ancestry in their or their spouse's background), says of Baudouin/Baldwin de Toulouse (murdered 1214) who, in abt. 1196, married Alix de Lautrec -- said to be ancestors of the famous 19th-century painter and illustrator Henri Toulouse-Lautrec -- that "depending on the source, many parents are possible", and refers us to a debate in the La Chesnaye-Desbois 1867 <i>Dictionare de la Noblesse</i>, volume 11, pages 750-51. I've looked at this (gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5424948p/f384.image), but of course I don't speak or read French, more's the pity. Anyone who felt like offering a translation would certainly bask in my appreciation. What I do note from a fairly simple Google search is that lots of modern historians appear to take it as established that Baldwin de Toulouse was a son of Raymond V de Toulouse by his wife Constance, daughter of Louis VI, and thus a brother to the Raymond VI who had him murdered. Example: https://books.google.com/books?id=eTEj0T6u7zUC&pg=PA23&lpg=PA23&dq=baldwin+of+toulouse+executed+1212&source=bl&ots=UbCjULBP5r&sig=SlTXBa-fgZKXj1wKKS_OVF5AAwQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjswbnHgcvNAhWJ2D4KHYPJApQQ6AEIJzAC#v=onepage&q=baldwin%20of%20toulouse%20executed%201212&f=false Is this a case of something that was an open question in 1867 having been resolved in more modern times? Or is it a case of historians simply not paying attention to genealogists, and continuing to propagate a centuries-old assumption regardless of lack of evidence, or even evidence discrediting it? -- Patrick Nielsen Hayden pnh@panix.com about.me/patricknh http://nielsenhayden.com/genealogy-tng/index.php

On Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 1:35:34 AM UTC, John Watson wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Here is a brief overview of the Mowbray family of Easby, Yorkshire as > I have it at the moment. If you need any specific sources, I'd be > happy to oblige. If you have any sources for Joan Wateby and her third > husband William Newsome of York, I'd be interested to see them. Their > daughter Maud (d. 1457), who married firstly Sir John Hotham (d. 30 > Sep 1419) is one of my ancestors. > > 1. William Mowbray of Easby in the parish of Stokesley, Yorkshire (ca. > 1275 - ca. 1320) > William de Mowbray married before 1310 Agnes, widow of Alan Baudewyne > [Baldwin]. On 1 April 1312, Alan Romund came before the king, on > Saturday in Easter week, and sought to replevy to William de Moubray > and Agnes his wife their land in Brunton-on-Swale, taken into the > king's hands for their default against against Olive, late the wife of > Walter Gill. On 20 November 1316, William de Moubray and Ralph de > Lestre were appointed to levy and take to York the 80 quarters of > wheat and 120 of oats which they were ordered to purvey in the > wapentake of Langebergh, Yorkshire. William was dead by 1320 and had > been succeeded by his elder son Thomas de Mowbray of Easby to whom a > debt was acknowledged on 13 January 1320. > > William Mowbray and Agnes had two sons, Thomas and John. > > 2a. Thomas Mowbray of Easby (ca. 1310 - 1377) first son of William > Mowbray and Agnes, married Alice. > On 1 May 1329, he described himself as a great-grandson of William de > Mowbray in a gift to Guisborough Priory "Willelmi de Moubray, proavi > ipsius Thomae, cujus haeres ipse est". The deed also names his wife as > Alice, "Thomam de Moubray et Alicia uxor ejus". In 1330 Thomas, son of > John de Hertford sued Thomas, son of William de Moubray for a messuage > and 140 acres of land and six acres of meadow and half a mill in > Barton near Melsamby. In 1348, the Prior of Guisbrough claimed against > Thomas de Moubray that he should acquit him of the service which the > Bishop of Durham requires for the free tenement which the Prior holds > of Thomas in Kepewyk. The will of Thomas Mubray of Esby in Cleveland > is dated 15 November 1377 and was proved on 21 November 1377. > John, son of Thomas was the ancestor of the later Mowbrays of Easby, > who seem to have died out in the late 1400s. > > 2b. Sir John Mowbray, (ca. 1315 - ca. 1373) second son of William > Mowbray and Agnes, married Margaret, daughter of Sir Alexander Percy > of Ormesby and Sneaton and his wife Julian. > "Johanne filio Willelmi de Moubray" was witness to a gift to > Guisborough Priory in 1347. In 1352, William, son of Sir Ivo de > Aldeburgh, gave to John, son of William de Moubray and Margaret, his > wife, his manor of Aldeburgh, in Richmondshire. On 11 July 1359 John > Moubray was appointed as a justice of the Bench. > > Sir John Mowbray and Margaret Percy had three sons, Alexander, William > and John (a clergyman). > > 3a. Sir Alexander Mowbray, (ca. 1330 - 1370) first son of John Mowbray > and Margaret Percy married Elizabeth de Musters, daughter of Henry de > Musters of Treswell, Nottinghamshire and Kirklington, Yorkshire and > his second wife, Elizabeth Thornhill. > > On 20 August 1355, Sir John de Musters (grandfather of Elizabeth) > granted by charter to John son of William Moubray and Alexander his > son and to Elizabeth daughter of Henry de Musters, now Alexander's > wife, all his manor of Kirtelyngton and all his lands in Syndreby. In > September 1367, Alexander son of John Moubray and Elizabeth his wife, > granted the manor of Kirklington to Sir John Moubray his father, for > life. On 6 February 1370, a commission of oyer and terminer was > ordered on information that many evildoers came to Kirtlyngton co,. > York, in array of war, broke the manse of the manor of John de Moubray > one of the justices of the Bench, while he was in the king's > protection, ravished and carried away Elizabeth late the wife of > Alexander Moubray, 'chivaler,' his son, took away goods of the said > John, and assaulted, wounded and imprisoned his men and servants. > Elizabeth later married the man who had abducted her - John de > Wandesford of Westwick, Yorkshire. > > Alexander Mowbray and Elizabeth Musters had two children, Alexander > and Elizabeth (see below). > > 3b. Sir William Mowbray, (ca. 1335 - 1391) second son of John Mowbray > and Margaret Percy married firstly, Ellen and secondly Margaret > Chaumont, daughter of John Chaumont, esq. of Colton in Ainsty, > Yorkshire and his wife Joan, daughter of Richard Wateby of York. > > William Mowbray died in 1391, seised of the manor of Barton, > Yorkshire, leaving a daughter Eleanor, afterwards wife of Thomas > Ingleby, and a widow Margaret. Margaret held the manor in dower until > her death in 1419, when it descended to William son of Thomas and > Eleanor Ingleby. In the will of William Mowbray of Colton, dated at > York on "le dymangue prouchayn avant le fest de Saynt Petre ad > vincula, la'n le Roy Richard le secound quynzesme" [26 July 1391] he > leaves alms to pray for the souls of his father John Mowbray, Master > John Mowbray his brother and Ellen once his wife. He also mentions > dame Margaret, his wife, dame Jane Chaumon, her sister, and Elizabeth > Gascoigne (daughter of his brother Alexander). > > William Mowbray and Margaret Chaumont had an only daughter Eleanor, > who married Thomas Ingleby of Ripley, Yorkshire. > > Margaret married secondly, before 25 June 1396, Walter Dallingridge > and thirdly William Cheyne. She died before 3 November 1419. > > 4a. Alexander Mowbray (ca. 1355 - 1380), son of Sir Alexander Mowbray > and Elizabeth Musters. > Alexander Mowbray married Eleanor in or before 1373. He died childless > about 1380 and his heir was his sister Elizabeth. > > 4b. Elizabeth Mowbray (ca. 1350 - 1396), daughter of Sir Alexander > Mowbray and Elizabeth Musters married Sir William Gascoigne of > Gawthorpe, Yorkshire, Chief Justice. > > > Best regards, > > John Hello John, after Alice de mowbray/ware died in 1530 england maybe york,yorkshire,would you know (working towards 1600s) I found ursla mowbray married william smthby in 1535. then Nicolas mowbray born 1545 leciestershire (Father) he also had a son John mowbray born 26th august 1565 in birstall,york, yorkshire. Nicolas was lord of easby, york, yorkshire ? after this found a john mowbray in 1580 leciester died 1639 his father and mother was john mowbray 1550-1634, elizabeth emerson 1520-1590, rutland leciester, if you know any more, thanks Neil Mowbray.

On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 6:23:54 AM UTC-7, taf wrote: > On Tuesday, June 28, 2016 at 8:53:05 PM UTC-7, Thomas Milton Tinney, Sr. wrote: > > UPDATED VERSION - Ignorance, False Promises and Pseudoscience: > > Truth in advertising, with a one-letter substitution. As has been made clear, this essay is full of ignorance, false premises and pseudoscience. > > taf REPLY: Your commentary is not impressive. [Genealogical relationships between early medieval and modern inhabitants of Piedmont. Abstract In the period between 400 to 800 AD, also known as the period of the Barbarian invasions, intense migration is documented in the historical record of Europe. However, little is known about the demographic impact of these historical movements, potentially ranging from negligible to substantial. . . . Analyses by Approximate Bayesian Computation showed that the latter model fits the data in most cases, with one exception, Trino Vercellese, in which the evidence was compatible with persistence up to the present time of genetic features observed among this early medieval population. We conclude that it is possible, in general, to detect evidence of genealogical ties between medieval and specific modern populations. However, only seldom did mitochondrial DNA data allow us to reject with confidence either model tested, which indicates that broader analyses, based on larger assemblages of samples and genetic markers, are needed to understand in detail the effects of medieval migration.] In other words, generally, inconclusive; without the official documentation, nothing. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25635682 And of course, Charlemagne’s DNA and Our Universal Royalty . . . Their results, published today in PLOS Biology, both confirm Chang’s mathematical approach and enrich it. Even within the past thousand years, Ralph and Coop found, people on opposite sides of the continent share a lot of segments in common–so many, in fact, that it’s statistically impossible for them to have gotten them all from a single ancestor. Instead, someone in Turkey and someone in England have to share a lot of ancestors. In fact, as Chang suspected, the only way to explain the DNA is to conclude that everyone who lived a thousand years ago who has any descendants today is an ancestor of every European. Charlemagne for everyone! . . . this appears to be [full of ignorance, false premises and pseudoscience.] http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/05/07/charlemagnes-dna-and-our-universal-royalty/

So who in New France is supposed to descend from Guy de Châtillon, comte de Saint-Pol, and Marie de Dreux, dame d'Elincourt?

On Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 1:35:34 AM UTC, John Watson wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Here is a brief overview of the Mowbray family of Easby, Yorkshire as > I have it at the moment. If you need any specific sources, I'd be > happy to oblige. If you have any sources for Joan Wateby and her third > husband William Newsome of York, I'd be interested to see them. Their > daughter Maud (d. 1457), who married firstly Sir John Hotham (d. 30 > Sep 1419) is one of my ancestors. > > 1. William Mowbray of Easby in the parish of Stokesley, Yorkshire (ca. > 1275 - ca. 1320) > William de Mowbray married before 1310 Agnes, widow of Alan Baudewyne > [Baldwin]. On 1 April 1312, Alan Romund came before the king, on > Saturday in Easter week, and sought to replevy to William de Moubray > and Agnes his wife their land in Brunton-on-Swale, taken into the > king's hands for their default against against Olive, late the wife of > Walter Gill. On 20 November 1316, William de Moubray and Ralph de > Lestre were appointed to levy and take to York the 80 quarters of > wheat and 120 of oats which they were ordered to purvey in the > wapentake of Langebergh, Yorkshire. William was dead by 1320 and had > been succeeded by his elder son Thomas de Mowbray of Easby to whom a > debt was acknowledged on 13 January 1320. > > William Mowbray and Agnes had two sons, Thomas and John. > > 2a. Thomas Mowbray of Easby (ca. 1310 - 1377) first son of William > Mowbray and Agnes, married Alice. > On 1 May 1329, he described himself as a great-grandson of William de > Mowbray in a gift to Guisborough Priory "Willelmi de Moubray, proavi > ipsius Thomae, cujus haeres ipse est". The deed also names his wife as > Alice, "Thomam de Moubray et Alicia uxor ejus". In 1330 Thomas, son of > John de Hertford sued Thomas, son of William de Moubray for a messuage > and 140 acres of land and six acres of meadow and half a mill in > Barton near Melsamby. In 1348, the Prior of Guisbrough claimed against > Thomas de Moubray that he should acquit him of the service which the > Bishop of Durham requires for the free tenement which the Prior holds > of Thomas in Kepewyk. The will of Thomas Mubray of Esby in Cleveland > is dated 15 November 1377 and was proved on 21 November 1377. > John, son of Thomas was the ancestor of the later Mowbrays of Easby, > who seem to have died out in the late 1400s. > > 2b. Sir John Mowbray, (ca. 1315 - ca. 1373) second son of William > Mowbray and Agnes, married Margaret, daughter of Sir Alexander Percy > of Ormesby and Sneaton and his wife Julian. > "Johanne filio Willelmi de Moubray" was witness to a gift to > Guisborough Priory in 1347. In 1352, William, son of Sir Ivo de > Aldeburgh, gave to John, son of William de Moubray and Margaret, his > wife, his manor of Aldeburgh, in Richmondshire. On 11 July 1359 John > Moubray was appointed as a justice of the Bench. > > Sir John Mowbray and Margaret Percy had three sons, Alexander, William > and John (a clergyman). > > 3a. Sir Alexander Mowbray, (ca. 1330 - 1370) first son of John Mowbray > and Margaret Percy married Elizabeth de Musters, daughter of Henry de > Musters of Treswell, Nottinghamshire and Kirklington, Yorkshire and > his second wife, Elizabeth Thornhill. > > On 20 August 1355, Sir John de Musters (grandfather of Elizabeth) > granted by charter to John son of William Moubray and Alexander his > son and to Elizabeth daughter of Henry de Musters, now Alexander's > wife, all his manor of Kirtelyngton and all his lands in Syndreby. In > September 1367, Alexander son of John Moubray and Elizabeth his wife, > granted the manor of Kirklington to Sir John Moubray his father, for > life. On 6 February 1370, a commission of oyer and terminer was > ordered on information that many evildoers came to Kirtlyngton co,. > York, in array of war, broke the manse of the manor of John de Moubray > one of the justices of the Bench, while he was in the king's > protection, ravished and carried away Elizabeth late the wife of > Alexander Moubray, 'chivaler,' his son, took away goods of the said > John, and assaulted, wounded and imprisoned his men and servants. > Elizabeth later married the man who had abducted her - John de > Wandesford of Westwick, Yorkshire. > > Alexander Mowbray and Elizabeth Musters had two children, Alexander > and Elizabeth (see below). > > 3b. Sir William Mowbray, (ca. 1335 - 1391) second son of John Mowbray > and Margaret Percy married firstly, Ellen and secondly Margaret > Chaumont, daughter of John Chaumont, esq. of Colton in Ainsty, > Yorkshire and his wife Joan, daughter of Richard Wateby of York. > > William Mowbray died in 1391, seised of the manor of Barton, > Yorkshire, leaving a daughter Eleanor, afterwards wife of Thomas > Ingleby, and a widow Margaret. Margaret held the manor in dower until > her death in 1419, when it descended to William son of Thomas and > Eleanor Ingleby. In the will of William Mowbray of Colton, dated at > York on "le dymangue prouchayn avant le fest de Saynt Petre ad > vincula, la'n le Roy Richard le secound quynzesme" [26 July 1391] he > leaves alms to pray for the souls of his father John Mowbray, Master > John Mowbray his brother and Ellen once his wife. He also mentions > dame Margaret, his wife, dame Jane Chaumon, her sister, and Elizabeth > Gascoigne (daughter of his brother Alexander). > > William Mowbray and Margaret Chaumont had an only daughter Eleanor, > who married Thomas Ingleby of Ripley, Yorkshire. > > Margaret married secondly, before 25 June 1396, Walter Dallingridge > and thirdly William Cheyne. She died before 3 November 1419. > > 4a. Alexander Mowbray (ca. 1355 - 1380), son of Sir Alexander Mowbray > and Elizabeth Musters. > Alexander Mowbray married Eleanor in or before 1373. He died childless > about 1380 and his heir was his sister Elizabeth. > > 4b. Elizabeth Mowbray (ca. 1350 - 1396), daughter of Sir Alexander > Mowbray and Elizabeth Musters married Sir William Gascoigne of > Gawthorpe, Yorkshire, Chief Justice. > > > Best regards, > > John

On Tuesday, June 28, 2016 at 8:53:05 PM UTC-7, Thomas Milton Tinney, Sr. wrote: > UPDATED VERSION - Ignorance, False Promises and Pseudoscience: Truth in advertising, with a one-letter substitution. As has been made clear, this essay is full of ignorance, false premises and pseudoscience. taf

Le mercredi 29 juin 2016 03:22:13 UTC+2, Nicole Dubois a écrit : > On Thursday, December 11, 2003 at 7:48:51 PM UTC-7, Kevan Barton wrote: > > Folks, > > > > Is there a list of known medieval connections to early New France (Quebec) > > settlers? If so, would you be so kind as to share it, or let me know > > where it is? > > > > Cheers, > > Kevan > > Hi Kevan, > I have 2 leads in my family. My grandmother on my father's side is a Courville dite De Billy. I have the generations back into france with them. I was always told there was a connection there to a king. Which one, I'm not too sure. Antoine De Billy, s/o Jean De Billy and Jeanne De Puiseux, married on Feb. 21, 1402/03 to Pernelle De Villiers, d/o Jean de Villiers and Jeanne de Vallengoujart. Pernelle was supposed to be the cousin to a king... I have been trying to find the cousin link, but still do not know where it is exactly. > On the other hand, my great grandmother on my mother's side was a Beauchamp who married into the Belanger line. I have gone back down the Beauchamp line to 1560, and from there I hit a wall. So I tried coming back from the first Beauchamp in France. One went to fight in England with William duke of Normandy. He and his family became very wealthy. The daughter of Thomas Beauchamp, the then Earl of Warwick, married 3 times her name was Marguerite Beauchamp. She had children with her first husband, and a daughter with the last one. The daughter was Margaret Beaufort, her father was the earl of Beaufort. She became the mother of King Henry VII and the grandmother to Henry VIII. I am looking to see who came back to france to form my great grandmother's line, but I have been hitting walls for a long time. So, now you know of at least 2 families that came west. I also have Abraham Martin's line since his daughter married a "Ratie"(Rate) and a son of hers Pierre Rate had a daughter who married into my mother's line the Paradis. I have the Paradis line, back into France in 1575, and the Martin line to about 1451 in Germany with Viet Martin. > My father's line is the "Dubois" line. I go back to 1645 in St.Hilaire-Foissac in what is now Bas-Limousin. > So, if you wish you can contact me at... madlady6250@gmail.com. I will help all I can. Good luck with your searches. Nicole Dubois Guy de Châtillon, comte de Saint-Pol 1254/-1317 &1292 Marie de Dreux, dame d'Elincourt 1268-1339 | Isabeau de Châtillon +1360 &1311 Guillaume, seigneur de Coucy +1335 | Enguerrand, seigneur de Coucy +1346 &ca 1338 Katharina von Habsburg 1320-1349 | Jeanne de Coucy 1340/1347 &1360/1370 Charles de Châtillon, seigneur de Souvain 1338-1401 | Jeanne de Châtillon, dame de L'Isle-Adam 1370-1457 &1383 Pierre de Villiers, seigneur de L'Isle-Adam 1365-1400 | Jean de Villiers, seigneur de L'Isle-Adam 1384-1437 & Jeanne de Vallengoujart +1446 | Pernelle de Villiers de L'Isle-Adam, dame d'Yvors Guy de Châtillon, comte de Saint-Pol 1254/-1317 &1292 Marie de Dreux, dame d'Elincourt 1268-1339 | Mahaut de Châtillon 1293-1358 &1308 Charles Ier, comte de Valois 1270-1325 | Isabelle de Valois 1313-1383 &1336 Pierre Ier, duc de Bourbon 1311-1356 | Jeanne de Bourbon 1337-1378 &1350 Charles V, roi de France 1337-1380 | Charles VI, roi de France 1368-1422