Trish and David, Books like the DeVinci Code have triggered many "theories" about the parentage of many a person that people are attempting to put certain people into their genealogy. And of course, those who enjoy these "theories" seem to be the best versed on them. Be cautious of the glib tongue and good wordsmith. Nothing replaces the good old paper trail and we often have to settle for a less than what we want in our genealogy search. How many of us with the Stuart/Stewart surname has a family myth about Mary, Queen of Scots? And how many are proven? Remember that Bonaparte had many issues and making himself a Stuart might well have been another. Nora in St. Louis ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trish Lawrence" <charli@iinet.net.au> To: <STEWART-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 7:31 AM Subject: Re: [STEWART] Re: Mary Queen of Scots Hi David - I too have heard this before - maybe Michael Stewart/ Lafosse says it in his book, 'Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland'. If not he, then maybe Laurence Gardner somewhere in his work? I will search it out if you are interested? Trish On 11/01/2006, at 9:21 PM, David Quinn wrote: > In fact the Stuart line really endures to this day.

Hi Nora I am not saying I agree with the theory about Napoleon, just that I have heard it before. As far as MQS goes, she has many descendants and I simply offered some of the known possibilities for people to try to connect to. I am totally aware the Da Vinci Code is a novel. However, long before Dan Brown there were many who wrote of these theories, including theological work. So always keep an open mind. Truth is often stranger than fiction. As far as claiming actual descent, I absolutely agree one needs a paper trail or other strong evidence. Trish On 11/01/2006, at 10:46 PM, Nora Yahl wrote: > Trish and David, > Books like the DeVinci Code have triggered many "theories" > about the parentage of many a person that people are > attempting to put certain people into their genealogy. And > of course, those who enjoy these "theories" seem to be the > best versed on them. Be cautious of the glib tongue and > good wordsmith. Nothing replaces the good old paper trail > and we often have to settle for a less than what we want in > our genealogy search. How many of us with the > Stuart/Stewart surname has a family myth about Mary, Queen > of Scots? And how many are proven? > > Remember that Bonaparte had many issues and making himself a > Stuart might well have been another. > > Nora in St. Louis > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Trish Lawrence" <charli@iinet.net.au> > To: <STEWART-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 7:31 AM > Subject: Re: [STEWART] Re: Mary Queen of Scots > > > Hi David - I too have heard this before - maybe Michael > Stewart/ > Lafosse says it in his book, 'Forgotten Monarchy of > Scotland'. If > not he, then maybe Laurence Gardner somewhere in his work? > I will > search it out if you are interested? > > Trish > > > > > On 11/01/2006, at 9:21 PM, David Quinn wrote: > >> In fact the Stuart line really endures to this day. > > > ==== STEWART Mailing List ==== > Need to contact the list admin? Send mail to STEWART- > admin@rootsweb.com > If you have issues to discuss re my management style, or about > other listmembers > or their posts, send your *private* comments to stewart- > admin@rootsweb.com."