Hello All, Now isn't this just what we all wonder at times ? When is a person a relative ? I shall attempt to shorten the situation for those of you who just came in to this discussion. Gaspard DE COLIGNY, the son of Gaspard DE COLGINY marries Charlotte DE LAVAL-MONTFORT and they have a tribe of children. These children would then be recorded as an anscestor if you happen to be related. But what is a relationship ? In most situations if your name is say DE COLGINY then your mother is very much a relative, well she is your mother. Now that is simple enough. And so we extend this line way back to Gaspard DE COLIGNY and so he is your umpteenth Grandfather. Again very simplistic genealogy. In some cases there is a second marriage and so what is the relationship between you and the second wife ? By blood, nil. By marrage, she is the wife of your Grandfather so many times removed. Now lets make this even more complicated. The second wife already has children. So what is the relationship between you and these children ? Some genealogy programs allow for the term "Step-Child" and so therefore they are step cousins or are they step something else to you ? And so listers we come to the topic of this subject. Gaspard DE COLIGNY dies 24th August, 1572. His wife passes away prior to him on 3rd of March, 1567. He "supposedly" marries a second time and so his natural children by Charlotte DE LAVAL now have a "Step-Mother", simply put, she is no relative to Gaspard descendents other than that, the second wife. And now folks for the really really biggie. Gaspard DE COLIGNY is recorded by some as having a second wife and no natural children with that union, or is there ? (Add information if you have documentation that indicates that there was a child of this union) And so Gaspard dies, this second wife reportedly "Adopts" a child after he, Gaspard, is long dead. What relation to you is this adopted child as he is, technically (ie by blood), not related to Gaspard DE COLIGNY at all ? Well how could he/she possibly be related to the DE COLIGNY family as the child does or at least did have a natural mother and father prior to being adopted by the second wife. So if the second wife is not related to you then surely the adopted child of the second wife is not even nearly related to you. Especially when the adopted child was adopted "after" the death of Gaspard DE COLIGNY. And so how can it be that a familly can claim the DE COLIGNY family as anscestors by way of the adopted child when there is no relationship between the adopted child and the DE COLIGNY line ? All clear as mud now ? I suppose one could place a note in the file that says that "I am related to the child who was adopted by the second wife of Gaspard DE COLIGNY after his death", which makes for some nice reading, but like many other historical points in all our genealogical research, that is all that it would be, a 'Remark' for future family members to delight in. Maybe I have a different understanding and some of you have another perspective on this topic, please go ahead and present your scenario for open discussion without any fear of ridicule or abuse from any listers. Discussion not damnation, please. Kind Regards, Peter Leroy

Hi Peter and all, From: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 2:22 PM > Gaspard DE COLIGNY, the son of Gaspard DE COLGINY > marries Charlotte DE LAVAL-MONTFORT and they have a > tribe of children. > snip > And now folks for the really really biggie. > > Gaspard DE COLIGNY is recorded by some as having a > second wife and no natural children with that union, or > is there ? (Add information if you have documentation > that indicates that there was a child of this union) Yes, there was. One. Europäische Stammtafeln agrees with Mr. van de Pas' web page. See vol XIV table 61. Gaspard and Jacqueline had a dau. Beatrix born 21.XII 1572 at Saint-Andre-de-Briord. Note that this is 4 months after Gaspard was murdered, so it is all legit. But she was born after his death. > And so Gaspard dies, this second wife reportedly > "Adopts" a child after he, Gaspard, is long dead. What is the alleged name of this alleged adopted child, please? Is it the above Beatrix or somebody else? When did it allegedly occur? Remember, Jackie died in 1599. > What relation to you is this adopted child as he is, > technically (ie by blood), not related to Gaspard DE > COLIGNY at all ? None, if adopted, it seems to me. How about a step-cousin-in-law, N times removed? :) But some people try to claim that kind of thing. They talk of "collateral" relatives. But these are not ancestors. Eg. My aunt had traced an alleged ascent to a Magna Charta Baron that went along ok till it jumped to an in-law that was not an ancestor. But first things first. Did this alleged adoption even occur? Or is it just some bogus invention like the non-existent illegitimate child of William the Silent invented to be the ancestor of Anneke Jans? Regards, Howard [email protected]

Hello again, Looking closer at Europäische Stammtafeln vol XIV table 61, I see that Jacqueline was imprisoned in 1573 and died in prison in 1599 widow of Claude de Bâtarnay Count du Bouchage. I don't know when she married Claude. But unless they let her out of prison and then put her back, it looks pretty unlikely that she was adopting anybody "after he, Gaspard, is long dead". Regards, Howard [email protected]